Jump to content

Talk:Internet access/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Image

  • Bulleted list item

In that image, internet access in the US is less than 25%. That data must be extraordinarily old, or otherwise wrong (the high end of the chart is about 20% of a nation's population being "internet users"). The Jade Knight (talk) 04:12, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

No, it's recent (June 2007), it's in tens of thousand, so you have to multiply the figures by 104, which for the USA gives a percentage of more than 60% (205,320,000/300,000,000). 16@r (talk) 04:32, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

"Countries where Internet access is available to the majority of the population"

The list of countries is vague as to how the list has been compiled. The section title is too long, and content is subjective. We need to decide on how to define "majority" and whether the list is based on total users or internet penetration or both.

128.146.27.45 (talk) 18:01, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Pointless map

The map gives the internet connection density times the number of inhabitants of a country. Now who on earth could be interrested in that? It's the internet connection density we want to know. On top of that, the scale is rather weird. Why not round numbers? DirkvdM (talk) 07:24, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Logic of second paragraph

The second paragraph begins to discuss a topic (speed) that is not relevant to the issue of access. It may be a good paragraph, but it belongs in another article, or under a separate subheading here. Furthermore, its first sentence seems to promise to define speed then wanders off without fulfilling the promise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ertdfgcvb (talk • contribs) 02:18, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Finally, the phrase "new media" is constantly repeated implying that it has a special meaning. What is it? Does new media mean internet? This should be clearly defined at first mention.

simplistic analogy needed?

I came to this article because of an issue I don't understand. How can electrical/phone wires carry signals up and down at the same time? And, by logical extension, to what extent are such internet connections "elastic" in terms of carrying capacity?

This comes from my thoughts of a non-elastic old technology (water flowing through a water pipe). It is clear that internet connectivity breaks that analogy in terms of two-directional flow, but to what extent does the analogy apply? Only to old-tech dialup service?

My lack of understanding may be explained by the fact that I'm old, but I think children will also ponder this analogy. Wikipedia is for everybody, right? A little help? Ertdfgcvb (talk) 02:40, 5 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ertdfgcvb (talk • contribs) 02:37, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Almost all telephones carry signals up and down on the same wires. The principle is older than the telephone, and more than a hundred years older than Internet. Two-wire circuit gives a rough idea how it works, and hybrid coil but you're right; neither those nor other articles adequately explain the basics of two way circuits. 56k modem and DSL perhaps do a better job with the conditions under which transmission capacity varies. Jim.henderson (talk) 23:19, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Countries where Internet access is widely available

Useless section; merely showing the flag of nearly every country on the planet. If there are countries where hardly anyone can get online, then the section should be about them rather than the opposite. Otherwise simply deleted. Jim.henderson (talk) 18:37, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Weird tone about ADSL

The paragraph on ADSL sounds like it was written in 2002. "Is becoming more widely available and can provide an excellent internet connection." It already became widely available even in poor countries 5-6 years ago and a 1024/256 plan is on the far low end as of 2009 and most can provide speeds way higher than this by now. ADSL itself is already a decade old technology, so citing this as a "standard" for internet access is rather off.--Spectatorbot13 (talk) 08:43, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh yes, and what's up with the sentence about Brazil witnessing a surge of new internet users "in the past 2 years"? From 2007-2009? Source?--Spectatorbot13 (talk) 03:33, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Duplication, possible merge

This article looks to me like it is essentially the same as broadband internet access. Is there a difference in terminology these days - I mean is all internet access broadband internet access. I'll wonder off to find the merge templates. --Opticalgirl (talk) 19:48, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Most Wireless mesh network, Wizzy Digital Courier, packet radio, CSD, HSCSD, GPRS and dial-up access cases, and some satellite internet providers fail the criteria for broadband Internet access. EDGE is also a corner case from an end-user perspective. Broadband is generally inferred to perform above 256kbit/s, though do keep in mind that (from the above link):
The FCC definition of broadband is 4.0 Mbit/s
Hence I strongly disagree with the duplicate tag. bkil (talk) 21:13, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Surely "Broadband" access, wherever the threshold may be placed, is an example or class of access, so if a merger is appropriate, the surviving article should be this Internet access one, including narrowband examples but mostly discussing broadband. If a merger is appropriate. Jim.henderson (talk) 11:43, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Yes, that sounds much better. I would support that. bkil (talk) 10:05, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

References

Reference 3 ( http://www.hri.ca/WSIS/ ) now goes to a 404. Not sure what the procedure for that is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.223.15.39 (talk) 11:48, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

How much is the broadband in US?

As long as I know the broadband is as low as 5 dollars per month in China, so I wonder How much is that in US? And If other people are interested, you can also list the broadband price in your country, LET US COMPARE!118.123.200.135 (talk) 04:45, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Worldwide view?

This article has been tagged as not providing a worldwide view since October 2010:

Has this issue been addressed in the last 18 months? Is more work needed? What specifically remains to be done? I'll wait a few days to see what others think, but am inclined to remove the "Globalize" template if there aren't specific suggestions for what remains to be done. -Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 14:25, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

 Done - I deleted the globalize template. Comments with specific suggestions about where and how the article could be improved to provide a more worldwide view of the subject are still welcome. -Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 15:21, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Wizzy Digital Courier?

What is "Wizzy Digital Courier"? It is a red link in this article in a list of lesser used Internet access technologies. Is it an Internet access technology? Does it belong in this article? Are there any references that can be used for it?

A Wikipedia article for Wizzy Digital Courier was deleted:

  • 08:36, 8 March 2012 Woohookitty (talk | contribs) deleted page Wizzy Digital Courier (Expired PROD, concern was: Lack of notability and references; the few inbound links from other articles are tentative; website no longer exists)
  • 19:25, 15 August 2005 Lucky 6.9 (talk | contribs) deleted page Wizzy Digital Courier (content was: 'The Wizzy Digital Courier is a project to distribute useful data to places with no internet connection. : Data normally carried by the dial ...' (and the only contributor was '159.148.13.146')

I found this at http://www.enotes.com/topic/Wizzy_Digital_Courier :

Wizzy Digital Courier is a project to distribute useful data to places with no Internet connection. Primarily for e-mail, it also carries web content (stored locally in a web cache). From an early description of the project 1:

Data normally carried by the dial up telephone link is instead physically carried by a mobile computer between the end user's location and a high bandwidth data drop to the Internet.

Delivery mechanisms are by overnight dialup, taking advantage of discount calling rates outside business hours, or USB memory stick. The USB stick uses the UUCP protocol, carrying information to and from a better-connected location - perhaps a school or local business, which acts as the dropoff for Email, and fetches web content by proxy. The email and web content is re-packaged as a UUCP transaction, and ferried back on the USB stick.

The project site offers a bootable CD image that lets users install Wizzy Digital Courier onto a computer, erasing what is already on the computer and installing a new operating system (a modification of CentOS Linux, itself a derivative of Red Hat Enterprise Linux) along with all of the Wizzy content.

My thinking right now is that Wizzy Digital Courier should be removed from this article and probably most or even all of the other Wikipedia articles where it currently appears. I'll do that in a few days depending on the reactions from others posted to this talk page.

-Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 15:21, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 Done - I went ahead and deleted the Wizzy Digital Courier link from this article. I haven't done anything about the references in other articles. -Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 15:17, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

"broadband cable provides a [?dedicated?] continuous connection with an ISP"

Location of Quote: Cable Internet access, Broadband access, Technologies.

I'm no expert in this topic or Wikipedia, but as far as I know, the bandwidth of that type of connection is not dedicated for each user. In fact, each group of users happen to be sharing an amount of bandwidth (where the group count and their assigned bandwidth is set by the ISP), which would lead to congestion if all of the group's users attempt to utilize the full amount of bandwidth they registered for.

For reference, read the last two paragraphs of "Data Rates" in the same page, and "Shared bandwidth" in "Cable Internet Access" page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ktx2skd (talk • contribs) 09:32, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

It really depends on the technology being used. DSL for example is really dedicated at least between the end user's DSL modem and the DSLAM. Cable access is usually shared. --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 15:24, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 Done -- I made some changes to deal with this. --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 15:31, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Capacity of TV whitespace

Wonderful work on this entry folks. I came looking for information about TV whitespaces trying to get a sense of the relative capacity of that option. How does its data capacity compare (in general non-technical terms) to other systems like fiber? ggatin (talk) 05:45, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Human Rights status in Estonia, Spain in Finland

Estonia

I am doing some research on the situation in Estonia and there is besides the cited article (http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0701/p07s01-woeu.html) no other source that Estonia has recognized the human rights character.

Legislation in 2000 has tackled this matter via an universal access strategy (§ 5 (1) Telecommunications Act 9 February 2000 (repealed), http://www.legaltext.ee/text/en/X30063K6.htm) and a right to internet access in public libraries (§ 33 Public Information Act Passed 15 November 2000; availble at http://www.legaltext.ee/text/en/X40095K4.htm). There is not one classification as human or fundamental right.

Other researches have not found anything more: http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/standardsetting/media/CDMSI/CDMSI(2012)Misc3_en.pdf.

Spain and Finland

The known legal sources for Finland (Sec. 60(C), Communications Market Act of 2003) and Spain (Art. 52, Sustainable Economy Act of 2011) do contain only universal service, that is not a human right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmoosbrugger (talk • contribs) 17:55, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

 Done. I changed the section heading, moved the last paragraph to the top of the section, and generally toned the section down a bit. Let me know if these changes address the concerns outlined above? --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 18:37, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Combination of FTTx and VDSL or ADSL

  • It appears that some countries—such as Japan—use a combination of FTTx and VDSL to serve most condos (except for new condos that have been prewired with optical fiber; in this case shared optical fiber is used). (For individual houses, it appears that shared optical fiber is currently preferred).
  • Optical fiber to a box on the street, and ADSL from there, is apparently used in many countries—such as in many parts of the US, I've heard. In Japan, the whole path from the telephone exchange to the subscriber is usually controlled by the telephone company, and VoIP phone service—including emergency number access—is offered more cheaply than POTS over copper.
  • Related Wikipedia articles appear to barely mention—or even omit—the situation where a combination of FTTx and VDSL or FTTx and ADSL is used. I'm wondering about the best way to cover this... LittleBen (talk) 03:26, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Major hubs

Can a section be made on where the major internet access distribution points are located ? Add the map: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:World_map_of_submarine_cables.png

KVDP (talk) 10:37, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Natural disasters and access?

The last section of the article, "Natural disasters and access" leaves me a bit uncomfortable. It just seems unbalanced and somewhat alarmist. My understanding is that the Internet has performed fairly well in the face of many natural and man made disasters. The section as currently written focuses on problems without saying anything positive about the Internet's performance and that tends to distort the view presented of the current situation. Does anyone else share this concern? --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 18:47, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Net neutrality

I'm uneasy about the way net neutrality is described in the second-to-last graf of the "Pricing" section:

Some ISPs estimate that about 5% of their users consume about 50% of the total bandwidth.[66] To ensure these high-bandwidth users do not slow down the network for everyone, some ISPs are considering, are experimenting with, or have implemented combinations of traffic based pricing, time of day or "peak" and "off peak" pricing, and bandwidth or traffic caps.

This seems to blindly support the stance of the ISPs, which isn't a crime, but does exclude the other viewpoint: It would be just as easy to replace last in necessity necessary aware in these high-bandwidth users do not slow down the network for everyone" with "Rather than upgrading their infrastructure to keep up with changing demand." I'm sure this invites a whole new discussion, but that particular line seemed to most obviously blame users for the shortcomings of providers and endorse one side of a debate that is still unsettled.Rabdill (talk) 21:14, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

 Done. I don't think the paragraph in question is about net neutrality. At least net neutrality is not mentioned by name in this part of the article or in the cited sources. In any case I reworked the paragraph to more closely follow the cited sources and to give both sides of the issue. Hopefully, my changes address the concerns expressed by Rabdill back in February. I removed the "POV-statement" template. -Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 04:15, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

khailulszec

i nkow about someone who are in your hei name is khailulszec from swizerland but i dont want to fight with you all but i just want detail about him and i from NIC ihave some satelit who are operation in moon wait for my signal.it dosent matter where am i right now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.13.210.231 (talk) 07:18, 20 June 2014 (UTC)


Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Internet access. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:58, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Internet access. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:58, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Internet access. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:22, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 15 external links on Internet access. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:46, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Internet_access/Archive_1&oldid=1017421504"