The problem, as many folks have discussed at length, is that the file size for HD movies, in particular, may be prohibitively large for the garden-variety home broadband user.

Storage isn’t a problem anymore. I just saw a 500GB USB drive for $140. Since the AppleTV isn’t meant to store this stuff permanently, adding that drive to your computer to store your HD movies would be fine. (Just be sure to back them up.)

LAN speed isn’t a problem anymore, since the AppleTV has 802.11n, and can support streaming an HD movie that isn’t synced to it from your machine. And since Apple also makes a base station that does 802.11n as well as printer sharing and

Content isn’t a problem anymore, at least for US audiences. There are plenty of video podcasts and HD and SD content available that will play on the AppleTV, and cheap tools to convert other content, like DVDs, to work with the AppleTV.

The problem I see is our outdated telecommunications networks. The monopoly or duopoly that most of the US lives under when it comes to broadband is stifling innovation. If it were a matter of population density, then NYC, LA, and especially San Francisco would be able to get similar offerings to Seoul or Tokyo. However, 100 megabit broadband for the price of our piddling 8 megabit asynchronous broadband does not exist anywhere in the US.

We need to change the telecommunications laws at the state and local level to increase competition and push out truly high-speed broadband, or products like the AppleTV or the Xbox 360, which can download HD movies, will never achieve their full potential.

What do I use port 80 for? WebDAV to share my iCals and files. I also keep an eye on my headless Mac Mini using a PHP script and a cronjob that takes a screenshot. I also SSH in to test connectivity from a different IP address, as well as to fix issues on my wife’s iBook (when she’s home) and run software updates. Sound valid? I think so.

Verizon lost a customer because they think I’m not a good enough person to manage my own computer. Because they’re too lazy or stupid to monitor machines connected to their network for proper service. And because they think their customers are children, dutifully consuming information and contributing nothing back. “Why would a residential customer need their inbound ports?” they ask. They don’t think that someone could be using the ‘inter’ part of the Internet.

If this isn’t a good argument for nationalization (or at least demonopolization) of the Internet, I don’t know what is. I pay them to give me an IP address and bandwidth. Period. What I do with the bandwidth is none of their damn business. (Unless it’s illegal. In which case, it is their business, because it’s the governments business. But only if they get a warrant.)
At the very least, why don’t they offer a la carte services. Pick the bandwidth you use, pick the ports you need opened, and pay based on that. Heck, they could even offer static IPs as a monthly fee. That way, people could get very, very low end service (no open ports, 1GB/month bandwidth) for $10/month. Want a port open? $0.99/month. Five ports for $3.99. All ports for $20/month. Need more bandwidth? $1 per GB per month. Symmetrical speeds? $20/month. Static IP? $10/month. And make it configurable over the Internet, so I don’t have to deal with your tech support troglodytes to do manage my connection. I know that these things aren’t expensive to set up, and any company who offered them would make a lot of profit on them.
So if anyone can find me a decent DSL provider that doesn’t cost more than $55/month and doesn’t treat me like a child, please post it in the comments. DSL Reports says the only other option is Earthlink, who blocks port 25 because of idiots are unkowingly running spambots.