Labour's Jeremy Corbyn wants high speed broadband for all. Wow, original idea there UK Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has said the party will not win elections using strategies from the past, as he promised to "democratise the internet" in his Digital Manifesto today. During the unveiling of the manifesto this morning, Corbyn said the party should build on the campaign social media tactics of Democratic …
The so called snooping train left a long time ago. Credit reference agencies know all about your financial spending and income habits, your contacts, friends, etc. anyway. Banks, other financial bodies, the HMRC, Government Departments and so on all have access to all of that lovely juicy data anyway. Is there is anything left to so called snoop? It cannot be much to worry about.
Now we can add in Big Brother Corbyn's digital passport, aka the digital ID card.'We see you bought something we do not like sorry your digital ID does not appear to work. No doctor or hospital treatment for you then, and you have no driving license validation and your bank account cannot be validated either, sorry. You can forget using the digital highway, your Identity card no longer works there either.'
Actually I can see quite a few benefits to the Digital Id idea.
It all depends on how it is used, but look at Estonia. They have a distributed set of services, all linked by a middleware layer with a unique identity product. That means that you have the ability to remotely prove that you are YOU to any entity that does business with the government by a single card. It does not mean that your identity is then shared between each service.
Rather you have an identity as BloggsJ with the water department, and as Joe Bloggs (L) with the driver licencing, and as Joseph Thomas Bloggs with the electoral roll etc. And then your digital identity acts as a proof acceptable to each service that you are that identity. And it is up to the end user to register each identity into the system, rather than having it done by fiat by the government.
It's far superior to the UK system of multiple redundant composite IDs, where you need a drivers licence and bank statement for this part, but a passport and national insurance number for that one, and bank statement and credit card for them over there etc etc.
The critical thing about a proper digital ID is that it doesn't replace all the existing systems, it acts as a complementary system. That way if it stops working or is stolen you can still go in person with a bank statement and say I am me...
As for the 25bn fibre rollout ... the Railtrack/Network Rail fiasco has already proven that the only way competition in the railways can work is with a neutral state body overseeing the basic infrastructure, with a monitoring body to ensure regular upgrades. We obviously need a similar entity for basic fibre infrastructure provision, because as Google has proved in the US, the cost of running cables far far exceeds the return people are willing to pay directly. Rollout via state taxation is the only way it can work.
However I would want it to be done in such a fashion that the ducts are large enough to allow easy inspection and maintenance and that rival cables can be laid if private groups want to pay for it.
That way you don't have to dig the damn street up every few months, which is where the main cost is. Dig the damn street up once, lay a gas trench, a water trench, a data trench and a power trench and cover em up. End of issue. Start in the newbuilds, in villages and small towns, then move to the suburbs, and finally the centres of the bigger cities where its a historical messy situation.
but look at Estonia. They have a distributed set of services, all linked by a middleware layer with a unique identity product.
Well, I suggest you go to Estonia. I don't like my government. I don't trust the fuckers. I don't want the obligation to prove I'm me to the fuckwits. And as far as I'm concerned they can shove their middleware up both holes between their second and third buttocks.
Incidentally, on your example of single trenching utilities, that's a bloody stupid idea because you have to dig most/all of the damned things up when there's one fault. I won't outline all of the reasons for that, but the basics are that the most likely to leak are at the lowest layer because they leak.
"I am presuming that 'democratising the internet' does not extend so far as Mr Corbyn using Virgin Media .. given his recent experience with Virgin Trains."
Would that be where he ignores 50 high speed connected houses in the street and goes to try and use it in the shed, in the overgrown garden, using a wet bit of string?
It would also needs long queues of packets waiting to be processed by the few state routers and switches - as long as they show your ID card. Meanwhile they will show you propaganda videos about a guy named Ivan Petrovich Stackanov who laid down a thousand miles of fiber in one night single handed (just the glass came from empty vodka bottles - by the fiber workers - so it doesn't work so well)
Packets that pays in foreign money or bitcoins will be able to access those special "routers for foreigners" which will be much, much faster...
The downvotes are probably from people too young to remember pre- Bliar socialism where equality was determined by the lowest common denominator.
Nice to see Corbyn has discovered the word ' digital' and applied it liberally to everything without having much idea of what he is really saying.
I can see a Citizen Digital Passport being the only way to access the British internet of the future, plus of course everything else in your life.
Oh well, "Under The Spreading Chestnut Tree" etc.
Wow two downvotes in a couple of minutes, upset a socialist or two? Well, I don't like the other lot either, idealists rarely contribute anything but ideals to a discussion, whichever way they bend.
Also people too young to remember how happy places USSR, East Germany, Hungary, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Poland, and Bulgaria were to live in. Especially when someone there tried to improve "socialism" a little and found tanks with a red star going up and down the roads to remember them which was the correct interpretation of "socialism".
Oh well, they are the same now incensing that little ex East Germany KGB agent....
> The downvotes are probably from people too young to remember pre- Bliar socialism...
My downwote is from someone who remembers well socialism in East Europe as he lived there and thinks you have no bloody idea what socialism looks like if you think there was any in the UK, pre-Blair or not.
"It's strange - I made the original post this morning when Europe was awake. Lots of downvotes. As the day has gone on, US is starting and lots of upvotes!"
You'd have gotten a lot more votes from a certain portion of US denizens if you'd used 'liberal' instead of 'socialism'
"Probably from people who can't get 4G in London upset at the idea that people in Wales might."
Corbyn's London is only the North of N1 part he's been MP for since Chris Smith went to the EU
In the lower part of Islington (south of (S)Upper Street) you barely get 3G on the Estates if you dare take your phone out of your pocket for that long (if you do, you ain't a local)
Between him and Smith they have promised the world in the past few weeks, and I bet none of it ever gets delivered if they get elected.
Politicians promises, pledges whatever should be legally binding, not just forgotten about when they have reached the position they want.
And as for Broadband ... as long as BT are allowed to carry on with their government supported monopolistic stance nothing will change soon.
I think everyone knows what you were commenting on :D
Okay, under what legislation would the European Commission be able to prevent a national regulator from imposing conditions on a company operating in a national market? Note, it's not really up to the deliberately toothless OfCom to decide whether OpenReach should be spun out of British Telecom, that would be for the monopolies commission. OfCom should be encouraging unbundling by making sure that there is a competitive market for unbundling (as in France) or alternative suppliers (as in Germany) through setting the prices and conditions of use of BT's network.
Though there are many arguments for splitting up the ownership of the infrastructure from running services on it. And many precedents for doing this in things like the energy markets (managed in Germany by a far beefier network regulator).
"Between him and Smith they have promised the world in the past few weeks, and I bet none of it ever gets delivered if they get elected".
Typical politicians. They promise you the moon on a stick, and all you get if you're very lucky is the stick - smashed over your head.
"£13bn would provide 80 per cent coverage (Analysis Mason, “The costs of deploying next-generation fibre-optic infrastructure”, 2008)
"
He's basing the costs of laying fibre on an eight-year-old report? And no-doubt the costings for running HS2 based on the likely cost of coal for the locomotives.
And the 80% coverage figure? In what way is that a good thing? Would we be happy if someone proposed providing mains water and electricity to 80% of properties, or health to 80% of people (all in the cities). Actually forget that last bit - the way health services are being centralised and rural GPs and dentists shut down, that's exactly what the governments are trying to do.
"He's basing the costs of laying fibre on an eight-year-old report? And no-doubt the costings for running HS2 based on the likely cost of coal for the locomotives."
So what else could he do?
"The laying of deploying next-generation fibre-optic infrastructure might cost around £13bn, but we're not too sure what that will be when we get in because the only report in to it dates from 2008, you're just going to have to take my word for it that it won't cost too much money".
80% coverage in terms of mains water or electricity, health etc would be very poor as at the moment it's nearer 100%. Yes health services are in decline in rural areas but is that Corbyn's fault? There has been no investment in the NHS since the ConDem government and even less so now with many NHS services actually facing cuts. It's not as if the NHS is a frivalous expense that we could do without, although most Tory MP's would disagree with that, saying their mates private health care system is better. But, what they don't think about (or choose to ignore) is that cancer, heart disease, broken bones etc don't discriminate. You could be poor and contract lung cancer, or you could be rich and suffer a major heart attack. How it's considered normal or justified to say to someone the level of care they can expect goes hand in hand with what they can afford is evil really. But that's a discussion for another day.
Anyway, at the moment, 53% of the UK is covered by LTE/4G. So yes, in this respect 80% is a great figured compared to what's gone before it. And it's also fair to expect someone living 15 miles outside of Chester could get the level of service those in London get. Money is the issue with all of this, but we've seen what austerity and no investment in to public services has done, and we've seen what investment in our infrastructure did to our economy in the years after WW2.
Ultimately money is going to dictate what can be done. But like what Tony Benn (RIP) said, we can find the money to go to war at the drop of a hat, but why can't we find the money to employ more nurses?
Anyway, at the moment, 53% of the UK is covered by LTE/4G. So yes, in this respect 80% is a great figured compared to what's gone before it. And it's also fair to expect someone living 15 miles outside of Chester could get the level of service those in London get.
You've cited the problem right there. Corbyn's complaining that some parts of Wales can't get one bar, but by all precedent the 20% who won't get the roll-out are precisely those people. You can't solve the 80/20 problem unless you aim for 100% coverage, and there isn't a commercial entity in the country that would do that out of choice, so it ends up being paid for out of taxation.
In a way, that is actually quite similar to the NHS. The "last 20%" are the people who always lose out, unless you stick to basic socialist redistribution of wealth principles - i.e. paying for a service from taxation.
But if you are going to pay a commercial company to install the darned thing in the first place, why not retain ownership of it? Handing over ownership while still paying subsidies (in whatever form) is (IMO) the main mistake made by successive governments since Thatcher started selling off public assets at below their true cost.
A kind of Railtrack for the nation's communications infrastructure. Nationally-owned, but able to call in external (private) contractors when necessary, but crucially, just paying them for the job done.
M.
"A kind of Railtrack for the nation's communications infrastructure. Nationally-owned, but able to call in external (private) contractors when necessary, but crucially, just paying them for the job done."
East Coast Rail Line. Previous franchise incumbent fucked up. Went back to public ownership. Turned it around and went into profit. But policy dictates it be franchised out again. Profitable line now has significant price increases. More pork anyone?
not all of that water is delivered at the same pressure, bandwidth, or to the same quality
There are certain minimum standards that potable water has to meet, so barring accidents tap water in the UK is safe to drink wherever you are. Even if you are in Liverpool with stolen Welsh water(*) you can be pretty sure we haven't stuffed too many dead sheep in the reservoir outlets.
It'll taste different around the country depending on where it originates and local choices regarding chorination, fluoridisation (is that a word?) etc, but it is water and it is safe.
Pressure and bandwidth, well yes, but the crucial difference is that if it's really bad you can make adjustments at your end and by installing a tank and (if necessary) a booster pump. You can't do that with t'internet.
M.
(*)Yes, we do have far too much water in Wales for our own needs, but it is still a sore point in parts of Wales. I was looking for a balanced article on the subject, but that mug says it all ;-)
"Pressure and bandwidth, well yes, but the crucial difference is that if it's really bad you can make adjustments at your end and by installing a tank and (if necessary) a booster pump. You can't do that with t'internet."
Well, you could install a caching server. Might need to be quite large though. And require lots of windmills, solar panels and unicorn droppings to keep it powered up 24/7.
While I was vehemently opposed to the mandatory ID card the last lot tried to bring in, I wouldn't automatically reject a voluntary system.
A lot would depend on just what information they wanted, and what they could do with it, but if it was limited to a simple "confirm identity, in similar situations as you already need to now, and nothing else" function I could see that being useful and not overly intrusive.
" Digital Citizen Passport " Hum, souds like an ID card...
That's what I thought at first, but if you read a little more, it's actually not too dissimilar to using public-key cryptography to prove you are who you say you are. You don't have to do this everywhere, just when you want to access government services.
If there is a voluntary digital ID card that has widespread use or a mandatory card, you can bet that it'll start being used to access government services, move on to bank verification, and end up being used to verify your age for porn sites in the UK.
Well, I say "end up" but that'll be the thin end of the wedge. Who could disagree with that? Then there'll be something else.
By the way I think the way a widespread digital ID card could be rolled out would be with a chipped driving licence, a chipped passport card given with a passport (like the Irish one), and finally a chipped card from the DSS for those who don't get one of the other two.
This post has been deleted by its author
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
