A new report by the FCC (Federal Communications Commission of United States) is out.  The Next Generation Connectivity report lays out where each country is when it comes to progress in Internet.  If you're Canadian, or live in Canada, don't read it, it's more depressing than the old song "yesterday" by the Beatles. 

In 2002, Canada was ranked 2nd in the 30 or so OECD countries.  In 2007 Canada dropped to 10th, and in 2009 Canada is 22nd just nudging past it's new rival: The Slovak Republic.  Here is the good and the bad:

  

-  In it's tight and head-to-head competition with the Slovak Republic, Canada has one category that is ahead: you guessed it price.  Yay you say?  Slovak Republic has most expensive rates in the world, and Canada is second!  That's right, our high speed prices are 2-3 times more than Japan, France, Italy, and Finland.

Overall, Canada wins one position ahead of Slovak Republic by ranking 22nd overall.  Iceland is 11th, and US 13th.  Go Canada Go!

Canada in it's high-speed downward spiral is taking steps.  In the wrong direction of course.  The new CRTC ruling will limit choice of internet providers.  Which is ok, because most of us Canadians living in the matrix are oblivious to the fact that there are choices besides the big hoarders like Bell, Rogers, Shaw, and Telus.  I use a third party, I'm very happy with them; and when I have an issue, they fix my issue then call me next day to make sure we're cool.  Sounds like a fantasy, ha?  Well I'm not going to name my Internet Service Provider because it would dilute my argument.  But this third party provider's party is about to be pooped by the new CRTC ruling.

If you feel like it, go here and write your MP.  I wrote mine, he wrote back. I think if a few more people write their MP, we just might find ourself past Portugal and behind United States with whom we normally hang.

p.s. Michael Geist has a good blog on this here.   And Ben Lucier's Blog is one of the first folks to get you in the know with news related to what matters: you + internet.

 

Like cowboys shooting from the hip, but not nearly as cool looking, the 24Hr news-cycle-based media does not seem to have time for facts or reason.  For example: I recently came across an article from BBC, claiming: "Organic 'has no health benefits'".   This decisive title is based on an indecisive research that selectively looked at 5% of published field work and could not find differences in the 10 (only) compared nutrients.  Even if you believe that your body runs on 10 nutrients, this study says that they couldn't find a nutritional difference between organic and conventional.  

Today, there is another article that unintentially misguides people: Make healthier choices when forced to eat the unknown. This article has its heart in a healthy place, and maybe falling shy on the correctness side.  The idea is to make smart choices if you are eating fast food.  The problem, however, is where they suggest you sub salad for the fries.

After finishing the article, I nearly got hit by a car as I ran across the street to McDonald's to verify.  It turns out, Big Mac + Medium Fries has 0.7g Trans Fats, not 10g!  Some might even be naturally occurring.  Calculate for yourself. 

Now I'm no proponent of eating out, or eating fast.  But Dammit...Jim, stop the misinformation!  Personally, I visit the Clown once every 4 years and don't go to chain restaurants, period!  And if I do, I only buy the fries!   Why? because A: They're somewhat yummy, and B: It's the devil I know (potato + re-fried oil).  As opposed to the salad dressing that is riddled with preservatives, sugars and fats.  When it comes to calories, and fats, a dressing loaded salad is very similar to fries.  I'll count the sugars in dressing out because the fries without ketchup is not a happy scenario for most people.

To their credit, the article does point out the low quality meat (it also means the animals ate low quality feed) and bun.  But they miss the hazards that are mayo and the bun.  You guessed it, preservatives yet again. Preservatives are designed to retard the growth of cells.  Guess what you are made of?  

By the time you clock out of there with your diet soft drink, you've loaded your system with tens of multiples of recommended daily intake of artificial sweetener plus a chemical lab's worth of material designed to help the seller of the food and not the buyer.  Sweeteners are designed to fool your nerves into picking up sweetness and not delivering the calories.  I file them in the same category are other substances that fool nerves into happy outcomes.

Yes, do be careful what you eat.  Decide for yourself whether your 60 million years of evolution-crafted body is better apt at processing naturally occurring fats or growth hormones, unnatural sweeteners, and living-cell-fighting preservatives.  Eat yummy, and eat less; so you don't have to make a dive choice and go for the salad dressing.  The salad greens with just some salt is a win, if you want to avoid all.  Just remember that "garden fresh" salad wasn't picked from the farm this morning.