I think it's the other way around: we place a high "intrinsic" value on certain objects because they stimulate our brains the way they do. Otherwise why should compressed carbon or base metals be worth more or less than anything else? Iron is a more useful metal than gold or silver for making tools, and you can't burn diamonds to keep warm in the winter.

..and solve three problems at once: Zero emissions, doesn't require fossil fuels, and more people will get off their fat lazy butts and get the exercise they NEED to be a reasonable weight and otherwise healthy.

See previous takes on "problems building infrastructure". I've heard this idea I don't know HOW many times before, and it's a fine idea -- for a science fiction novel.

Let's just say that over the course of my life, I've discovered that having skepticism as my default attitude is orders of magnitude safer than optimism, especially when it comes to politics and politicians: Prepare for the worst, hope for the best. ;-)

Preface: I voted for Obama. Why? No better choices. That being said, I think he's on the up-and-up.

That being out of the way: This sounds lovely on paper, but I don't think it's going to work out the way he thinks it will; much easier said than done. Telecoms all over the country have been resistant (to say the least!) of "free" broadband, and they sure as hell haven't been trying to reduce the costs of broadband OR going out of their way to increase the size (OR the capacity!) of their networks. My $0.02 worth on the subject is that throwing money at this subject likely won't do much of anything other than line the already well-lined pockets of the telecoms, there needs to be some sort of reform(s) to go along with it (read as: strings attached to the money, SERIOUS strings). Even then.. not so sure I want the gov'ment mucking about with the Internet any more than they already do.

Let's see if you say that one year from now! From what I'm hearing, it's going to get worse, much worse, before it gets better. :p

I disagree; what it mainly will do is give the illusion that Australia's children are being protected from the Big Bad 'Ol Intarwebs -- which is to say that it'll make some busybody politicians look good to their constituency.

Don't they have anything better to do over there than screw with the internet? Don't they have some crime problems to solve or something?

What I'm seeing here indicates that it's an array consisting of banks of capacitors in series to get the working voltage, and then connected in parallel to get the overall capacity.

But, how long will it take to charge with the optional Mr. Fusion unit? How about with the optional lightning-rod emergengy-charging attachment?

Second that, all of it. They want a fight? BT has been more or less on the up-and-up thusfar, because it wasn't created solely for illegal purposes -- but if you piss off the developers, they'll just start obfuscating the traffic by design somehow. What they don't get is that they can't stop it if it's what enough people want.

I'd prefer to hope that the RIAA is starting to get the clue, but I'm still way too cynical to believe that yet. Sad thing is that if the RIAA would take all the money they've been paying lawyers thus far and apply it to an updated business model, they'd get much more benefit out of it quicker than any number of lawsuits against people who have no money to start with!

Also, this: MEMO TO RIAA: You're NOT going to stop people from sharing music. You couldn't stop it when it was cassette tapes recorded off of vinyl, you couldn't stop it when it was cassette tapes copied off of CDs, you couldn't stop it when it was CDs ripped to CDRs, you couldn't stop it when it was CDs ripped to MP3s, and you haven't stopped it when it was MP3s and AACs shared directly over the public internet. What makes you think you can ever stop it? GIVE UP NOW!!!

*sigh*
If all you have is $18, then all you're going to SPEND is $18. If all you're doing is email and light web browsing and you don't CARE that it's censored by the government, then you're likely to spend as little as possible. If you WANT faster speed and/or WANT uncensored access and (most importantly) you HAVE the money then you're GOING to pay to get what you want -- but again I say, if all you HAVE is $18 then all you're going to SPEND is $18; you can't eat steak on a hamburger budget not matter how hard you wish for steak. Similarly if all you have for internet is ZERO DOLLARS then you're not going to have internet AT ALL unless there is an alternative. I DON'T AGREE WITH YOU AT ALL and your assertion that it's "common sense" is a bunch of hot air and speculation as much as what I AM SAYING is speculation or what ANYONE has to say on the subject is speculation. End of discussion.

Gee, where did I say I wanted to replace it with a "government monopoly"? That would be an exceedingly stupid idea! Some competition for the telcos probably wouldn't hurt though! And by the way what's so wrong with there being some form of free public internet service for people who can't afford something faster? Even if it was wifi with throughput equivalent to dialup speeds it would be better than nothing for people with limited incomes who can't afford to pay for anything!

...not! I'm not in the least bit surprised, considering that every time someone tries to spearhead any type of free broadband internet access for the American public, it gets shouted down by corporate types from all four corners of the country. After all, we can't have Big Telecom's strangle-hold monopoly on broadband broken by even our puny government, now can we? Wasn't there a U.S. city that recently was sued by a telecom because they had the unmitigated gall to actually make plans to build their own fiber network for use by their residents, because that telecom didn't want to be bothered to build the infrastructure themselves? If you think things are strange now, just wait: I see very stormy times ahead; the War for the Internet is just beginning.

1. The Australian government listens to the people and to experts on the subject and dumpsterize the whole idea
2. The Australian government doesn't listen to the people, go ahead with their plan, it fails miserably. Government officials backing the plan are discredited for time and taxpayer money wasted, hopefully are ousted

Either way this sort of ill-conceived idea is discredited even further, and hopefully more governments will take heed and NOT consider it.