The New York Times

SEOUL, South Korea — South Korea already claims the world’s fastest Internet connections — the fastest globally by far — but that is hardly good enough for the government here.

By the end of 2012, South Korea intends to connect every home in the country to the Internet at one gigabit per second. That would be a tenfold increase from the already blazing national standard and more than 200 times as fast as the average household setup in the United States.

A pilot gigabit project initiated by the government is under way, with 1,500 households in five South Korean cities wired. Each customer pays about 30,000 won a month, or less than $27.

Wow! One gigabit/sec would be unbelievable.

Found by Cinàedh.

  1. Cursor_ says:

    #15 Added bonus is you can make tons of popcorn!

    Just had to throw that in as it was microwave.

    As of right now the government is either lax or non-existent in controlling the providers of broadband.

    Hence this is a free market for that sector of business.

    So it is painfully obvious that the free market is failing us as the providers simply do not want to pay for that last mile to bring us the speed.

    We ask for it and they ignore us, because it is too boo hoo expensive to do that and our profits would go down in the short term. The shareholders would have our heads if they had to WAIT for profit.

    Free market, code word for business can screw you and you have no recourse.


  2. Vivek Kundra (CIO of the USA) says:

    “And think about this, I know there are people on Second Life right now, but imagine a Universe where you have the Star-Trek holodeck where you could literally ask the computer, err, to act or ask questions to get answers. In the same way, if you look at some of these software companies they’ve made it sooo complicated to interact with their technologies. Ah and, err, at the same time the underlying architecture and the platform, it’s almost a chicken and egg question because alot of it was built and architected around bandwidth constraints therefore you had to deploy technologies that were much more complicated in terms of interacting and communicating. Now, as broadband deployment, and more importantly, err, if you look at the megabits-per-second, err, how much, err, how much information can we get through the pipeline is going to be so important and, as new and new software and techologies are being introduced, what you going to see is huuuge-change from how applications are architected from skip-logic to video and much more human ways of interacting with these applications rather than, err, binary or COBOL ways of interacting.”

  3. JimD says:

    The “By the Minute” DINOSAURS that run Amerecan Telecoms WOULD NEVER ALLOW ANYTHING LIKE THIS !!! What would they do with their BILLING MACHINES ??? Gotta have “REVENUE” along with MONOPOLY RENTS !!! America will ALWAYS LAG BEHIND IN “SERVICES” REGARDLESS OF WHERE THE TECHNOLOGY IS INVENTED !!!

  4. Animby says:

    #23 – Jimmy D – you write funny but you have some points.

    Let’s just hope the Google 1 gig demonstrations are a great success. Then maybe Google will start to roll out in other markets and drive the competition.

  5. tdkyo says:

    Dear People,

    This news only matters if you live in Korea AND decide to surf only websites that are located within Korea.

    Reason? The backbone connecting Korea to the rest of the web is quite weak to the point that these high speed upgrades are negligible.

    This might matter to those who are Koreans and who surf Korean websites, but not to those saying “Im gonna move to Korea for teh high speed interwebz!”

  6. 1873 Colt says:

    Good for them.

  7. Animby says:

    # 25 tdkyo said, “The backbone connecting Korea to the rest of the web is quite weak to the point that these high speed upgrades are negligible.”
    New transpacific cables are coming on line. Korean servers already cache everything they can. I think a gig down speed is gonna be pretty damned fast.

  8. CrankyGeeksFan says:

    By 1990, Japan – NTT, government, others perhaps – had made the decision to pull all of the copper telephone wiring out and replace it with fiber optic cables. The US government and telecommunication providers just don’t work that way. It’s still local monopolies.

    The US apparently will get a big push in wireless speeds and coverage. Capital outlay simply means less profits for many companies.

    # 17 Guyver – I thought DARPA was working on removing centralized command and control for the ICBMs when packet switching was developed.

  9. sargasso_c says:

    Nature abhors a content vacuum.

  10. chris says:

    “That’s because having an Internet connection isn’t an entitlement. If you want it, you should pay for it rather than wanting your fellow citizens to subsidize it for you.”

    Oh, easy enough. Where do I go to get a link like this at my residence?

    #17 “They’re just getting you to subsidize their “upgrades” for an infrastructure that’s essentially a sunk cost:”

    Sure, in each region there are only a few major providers who collude to keep costs high and tech improvements minimal.

    So it is bad for the state to improve tech, while you give examples how the US gov’t has successfully done so in the past, but you acknowledge the private providers are lazy and cheap.

    A free market solution to this would require competitors who actually compete, both on price and services. This would mean not allowing big lazy companies to buy/sue their upstart competitors out of the market. And that requires government.

    Government has a role whether you like it or not. If there is NO government things are going to suck as much, or more, than total government.

  11. Greg Allen says:

    If you WANT Korea, China and India to kick America’s butt in the new economy, keep voting GOP.