ManyMedia

The National Broadband Plan hasn’t been completed as a draft or even bullet points, but the ax is already coming down. The Plan is likely to disappoint us, says Business Week in their article National Broadband Plan: Why Consumers May Be Let Down:

Defining broadband is an important effort (so is mapping out where broadband is), but consumers are likely to be disappointed by the National Broadband Plan, because the divide between what the American people want and how the government works means a lot of consumers’ desires will fall into the chasm between.

There’s no “likely” about it. American citizens who are hoping for better access to the Internet–or any access at all–will most certainly be disappointed to find out that nothing will change except for the increasing cost. I’m not surprised, but wish it wasn’t costing taxpayers so much.

Telecom lobbyists are paying less and getting more for their campaign contributions these days. I don’t see a reason to believe that things will change, given the current perspective and dialog. More importantly in this article, the notion of “broadband” (the means of getting access to the Internet) is being framed as the end game. Broadband is not the end game.

Make no mistake: Broadband is NOT the same as the Internet. Broadband is a poorly defined speed, a pipe, the means by which we access the Internet. It’s a marketing term used by the telephone and cable companies to describe their paltry offerings, which have resulted in the United States being ranked 17th in the world (and falling). A significant problem with using “broadband” as our national goal is that the FCC has not defined or measured it, or assessed its distribution (PDF). Of course the telephone and cable companies know, but they aren’t telling. And they’re effectively in charge for now.

If I could pull the plug on this well-financed debacle, I would in a heartbeat. Instead of focusing on the means (the pipe used to get there), let’s focus on the real goal: access to the Internet.

I propose that instead of pursuing this losing battle, we start talking about a Global Internet Plan for America. Why?

• We’re really trying to get access to the global Internet resources: everything that is available now and being created in the future. We want access to the global Internet. The Internet offers advanced information services and benefits to everyone, in many languages and many forms.
• The United States of America has unique political and technological resources, so this Plan is uniquely designed for Americans. Americans care about each other. We want our nation recover to economically. We want the best for our kids. We want all benefits to be widely available, in rural as well as urban settings. We don’t want our families, friends, or ourselves to be denied or limited access to the benefits of the Internet for any reason.

How do we get there? The current “debate” needs to be reframed to show priority for citizen-customer concerns and experiences. As the debate is framed now, it allows incumbent service providers to divide and conquer the conversation, the possibilities for change, and our future. Here are a few new ways to talk about this global Internet plan for America.

Decoupling access from delivery: The global Internet represents significant economic development benefits in the form of more competitive choices, lower prices, and faster performance. However, our service providers are increasingly serving as gatekeepers, choosing what information and how (devices, speed, etc.) we can or can not access it. Americans will realize the greatest benefit only if we decouple the Internet goods and services from the delivery pipe (broadband). This is called structural separation. For the greatest amount of benefit, we should be allowed to choose for ourselves what information to access, on our schedules and according to our needs, using our choice of hardware devices and software.

Monopoly rents as private taxation: Since the telephone and cable companies are the only game in town (where there is Internet access), they have considerable persuasive abilities when it comes to raising rates.  Citing Kushnick’s Law: “A regulated company will always renege on promises to provide public benefits tomorrow in exchange for regulatory and financial benefits today.” For instance, we’ve already paid $300 billion dollars in approved phone rate increases for telephone company promises that have never been fulfilled. One way of looking at this is as a private tax that takes in ever-increasing amount of our income. How often have you heard of local Public Utilities Commissions denying rate hikes? That doesn’t happen very often!

Coverage is not competition: Broadband service over telephone lines (DSL) has physical distance limitations, so is not available to all homes or businesses. Broadband over cable lines (cable modem service) passes a majority of homes in the nation, and is sometimes the only choice for access. In these areas, the price of access is high. What this means is that there are parts of the nation which either do not have access to the Internet at all, or have effectively one choice for providers. A Brookings Working Paper from 2002, The United States Broadband Problem: Analysis and Policy Recommendations (PDF), states the problem accurately:

Thus the effect of current industry structure is to generate a stable duopoly in residential Internet services, with continued monopoly control in most other markets – by the ILECs in voice and business data services, and by the CATV industry in residential video. Neither industry would logically be interested in provoking highly dynamic competition in open-architecture, high speed, and/or symmetric broadband services to either businesses or homes. Hence the slow pace of improvement in broadband services is not surprising. Unfortunately, however, it damages the economic growth, social welfare, and national security of the United States, and indeed of the world.

This means that any claims of nationwide coverage are suspect. As mentioned above, actual coverage and subscriber/customer data is not shared with the government, so the FCC doesn’t know how bad this problem is. However, there is no reason that access to the benefits of the Internet should be denied to any of our nation’s citizens. Keeping the data secret does not serve in the nation’s best interest. I want an Internet plan that works for all Americans.

There are more issues that can be properly described: problems inherent in the current state of the industry, and solutions that support ubiquitous access to the global Internet by all Americans. This is a plan I want to see come to life. This is the plan that will bring benefits to the entire nation. I am not alone in calling for this plan.

I welcome your additions in the comments below. Thanks go to George Lakoff for perspective on reframing this issue.

Content, Devices, Network, Policy choice, incumbents, Internet, self-determination, service providers

I was tickled to read Good Gear Guide’s interview on MenuetOS, a new operating system that is built in assemby language. The interview, titled We talk to the developers behind MenuetOS: an operating system written entirely in assembly language, says that not only does this OS fit on a floppy disk (remember those?), it’s incredibly fast and efficient. No surprise there: assembly language is designed to work close to the hardware. From the article:

Is either [32-bit or 64-bit] version of Menuet used in any production environments? Do you see this as a hobby/educational exercise or are you aiming for a system that will fill a particular niche in the operation system ecosystem? That is, is there a target audience for Menuet, or is it all about the development process?

Madis: The most important about Menuet is its small footprint as it still fits on a floppy. The niche can be some embedded device. What is also important is that its x86-based and therefore portable to most compatible devices. Now that Mac is using Intel CPUs and future Larrabees from Intel will also be using a subset of x86 ISA.

Ville: Menuet is used in environments that require real-time control over other devices. Currently Menuet is mainly used among hobbyists who are interested in assembly language. And assembly niche is actually a pretty sweet one. There are new exiting features to learn and most importantly, you never know what kind of usages people come up with. Our team’s current goal is to get the version 1.0 out.

I’m no kernel geek, but I know that any operating system that’s built from the hardware up makes way more sense than writing the features, integrating the drivers, then customizing and tweaking that bulky interpretive code to the specifications of the device. I hope that MenuetOS is part of a greater movement toward OS efficiency, and away from default OS configurations with “features” that I can’t modify or delete. Let my OS be user-driven, not something I spend too much time waiting for and ultimately dread working with. Let the (r)evolution begin!

Devices menuet, menuetOS, operating systems

This video is Gigi Sohn with Public Knowledge talking about why the FCC is looking into what’s going on between Apple and AT&T. The Consumerist published the FCC letters to Apple and AT&T. Entrepreneur and telecom pundit Bob Frankston added an interesting comment to a (barely formatted) mailing list about why the historic Hush-a-Phone decision is applicable.

On a related note, Jason Calcanis wrote a widely circulated piece, The Case Against Apple-In Five Parts. It seems that Apple is the new Microsoft, and AT&T is, well, the same old AT&T as it was before. The more things change, the more they stay the same. I hope this matter is interesting to watch.

Devices, Network, Policy Apple, applications, ATT, FCC, hush-a-phone, Policy, tying

Reps. Edward J. Markey (D-MA) and Anna G. Eshoo (D-CA) introduced a bill (full text, PDF) on July 31, 2009 to establish a clear national broadband policy that ensures an open and consumer oriented Internet. In a press release from Rep. Markey, he stated, “This bill will protect consumers and content providers because it will restore the guarantee that one does not have to ask permission to innovate.” Rep. Eshoo added that “The Internet has thrived and revolutionized business and the economy precisely because it started as an open technology.” About their bill, H.R. 3458:

H.R. 3458, the Internet Freedom Preservation Act, is designed to assess and promote Internet freedom for consumers and content providers.  The bill states that it is the policy of the United States to protect the right of consumers to access lawful content, run lawful applications, and use lawful services of their choice on the Internet while preserving and promoting the open and interconnected nature of broadband networks, enabling consumers to connect to such networks their choice of lawful devices, as long as such devices do not harm the network.  The legislation also directs the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to promulgate several rules relating to enforcement and implementation of the legislation, including rules to ensure that providers of Internet access service fulfill the duties and disclose meaningful information to consumers about a provider’s Internet access service in clear, uniform, and conspicuous manner.  H.R. 3458 makes clear that it does not prohibit an Internet access provider from engaging in reasonable network management consistent with the policies and duties of nondiscrimination and openness set forth in the bill, nor does the legislation affect any law or regulation addressing prohibited or unlawful activity, including any laws or regulations prohibiting theft of content.

Yes, there are controversies lately that prompt this legislative action. The controversies include the recent rift between Apple/AT&T and Google Voice, inquiry into exclusive arrangements between wireless carriers and cell phone manufacturers, and what Doc Searls so appropriately calls The Dawn of the Living Infrastructure. It’s time to focus on this issue (again). Citing Doc:

Let’s face it. Mike Arrington’s problem with the iPhone, Om Malik’s problem with AT&T, the FCC’s problem with Apple + AT&T together, my own problems with Cox, Dish Network and Sprint, David Pogue’s problem with the whole freaking cell phone industry … all of these are a great big WAAAH! in the wilderness of industrial oblivity to what customers want. We’re in the graveyard of what Umair Haque calls the zombieconomy. We’re living in Night of the Living Dead and complaining that the zombies want to eat us alive.

What they really want is to strap us down while they bleed us for small change—tiny amounts of ARPU. They do this, for example, by forcing us to sit through “The … number … you … have … dialed … eight … zero … five … seven …” until a small ka-ching happens somewhere deep in their billing system, so you get bled whether or not you’ve left (or received) a message. David Pogue:

Is 15 seconds here and there that big a deal? Well, Verizon has 70 million customers. If each customer leaves one message and checks voicemail once a day, Verizon rakes in — are you sitting down? — $850 million a year. That’s right: $850 million, just from making us sit through those 15-second airtime-eating instructions.

This is death by a thousand paper cuts. More importantly, it’s a tax on innovation and the ability to connect and be creative. Let’s put a stop to it.

Devices, Network, Policy antitrust, cell phone carriers, mobile tech, network neutrality, open networks, zombieconomy

This is a serious moment, if delivered for comedic value. I’m shocked, shocked to learn that our cell phone records are not being protected by our carriers. The Washington Post’s article Online Data Gets Personal: Cell Phone Records for Sale describes the nature of the problem:

“This is a person’s associations,” said Daniel J. Solove, a George Washington University Law School professor who specializes in privacy issues. “Who their physicians are, are they seeing a psychiatrist, companies they do business with . . . it’s a real wealth of data to find out the people that a person interacts with.”

Such records could be used by criminals, such as stalkers or abusive spouses trying to find victims.

Unlike Social Security numbers, which are on many public documents that have been scooped up for years by data brokers, the only repository of telephone call records is the phone companies.

Outraged and in response, the video (above) reflects John Hargrave’s approach. “I’m here on behalf of Verizon customers. PLEASE DO A BETTER JOB PROTECTING YOUR CUSTOMERS’ CELL PHONE RECORDS!” said Hargrave through his bullhorn.

The common response by cell phone service providers is to point out that obtaining and selling cell phone records is illegal, and their Terms of Service changes in response to these kinds of things. Of course, we know how many people read the tiny, tiny legaleze that comes in our billing envelopes (provided we get one in the mail). More importantly, we know that people engaged in criminal activity pay great attention to compliance with these TOS docs. Right. “Can you hear me now?”

Devices, Identity, Life, Policy crime, phone records, records, terms of service, TOS, Verizon

This is a moment reminiscent of The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. The supercomputer, Deep Thought, was asked about the ultimate meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything. Deep Thought began to “think” on this question, and then the wait began.

While I don’t think we’ll have to wait 7.5 million years, it sometimes feels like a Smart Grid for electric power is following a similar path. What’s a Smart Grid? CNet has a nice article called FAQ: What the smart grid means to you. In it, author LaMonica answers some of the frequently asked Smart Grid questions:

What is the smart grid?
Building the smart grid means adding computer and communications technology to the existing electricity grid. With an overlay of digital technology, the grid promises to operate more efficiently and reliably. It can also accommodate more solar and wind power, which are inconsistent sources of energy that can become more reliable with better controls. Much like computers and routers manage the flow of bits on the Internet, smart-grid technologies use information to optimize the flow of electricity.

What would a smart grid be able to do that today’s not-so-smart grid can’t?
Right now, if there’s a breakdown at your local substation, the utility usually finds out when customers call to complain. Placing a networked sensor inside a transformer or along wires could locate and report a problem, or prevent it from happening in the first place.

Despite living in the age of information, most of us only get a glimpse of our energy consumption when the utility bills come once a month. …

Indeed, many of us are surprised each month to find that 1) we’ve used more (or occasionally less) power than the month before, and/or 2) rates just went up again.

What about asking appliance manufacturers to help? Appliances like washers, dryers, and refrigerators must be able to recognize and accept commands from the grid or from home controllers (such as pictured above). Ars Technica’s article GE brings smart grids to life as appliances gain support points out that GE supplies up to a third of the appliances sold in the US. Ars reports that GE has signed a deal with software provider Tendril, allowing GE appliances to “play nicely with the smart grid.”

The promise of a smart grid depends on the degree of sophistication of the hardware and software involved. …

At their most sophisticated, these kinds of appliances will enable two-way communications in order to provide demand response management. Utilities can provide a signal when electricity supplies are getting tight; consumers can set their appliances to respond accordingly, by temporarily shutting off the hot water heater or raising the thermostat slightly on hot days. The consumer will get lower electric rates for their participation, while the utility gets to avoid activating its oldest and least efficient plants.

To get all of that to work, however, you need the right hardware in place; a dumb refrigerator won’t contribute much to the smart grid. …

So where are we in the process? CNet’s LaMonica continues:

OK, so the smart grid is supposed to reduce wasted energy, give consumers better information, and allow the grid to use more solar and wind power. What’s the hold-up?

Where to start?

Utilities aren’t known as the most fleet-of-foot businesses and the energy industry invests a lower percentage of revenue in technology than most industries. This helps explain why we’ve been hearing about the grid for 10 years but very few of us actually have it.

But lack of investment is only part of the picture. The whole point of a smarter grid is to use electricity more efficiently, but in many states in the U.S. utilities operate without strong incentives for efficiency, say industry executives. They invest big dollars–think multibillion-dollar power plants–based on their ability to sell more kilowatt-hours, not less. The more progressive utilities have found ways to justify their investments in the smart grid based on savings from energy reductions, but many utilities aren’t nearly as enthusiastic because of how they are regulated.

Regulation. That’s an interesting place to start. Right now the House has passed and the Senate is considering the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009. It’s a long and comprehensive proposal to make our nation more energy efficient. HR2454 goes a long way to change the promise of a smart grid–and renewable energy, clean transportation, energy efficiency, and more–into a reality. I am optimistic!

Devices, Network, Policy appliances, control, efficiency, electric, gas, HR2454, power, smart grid, utilities, water

Next session: The Future of Broadband Mobility. Ken Zita (KZ) moderates with speakers Jen-Hon Lin (JHL), Sachio Semmoto (SS), Yoshiyuki Takeda (YT), and Michael Tyler (MT).

Ken Zita:

How about let’s talk about 4G? Broadband mobility is where the future is going. Mobile phones are everywhere. This is about the fast change that affects the social fabric of the world.

The arrival of very high speed and all-IP mobile networks is imminent. “4G” will transform markets and mobile services paradigm worldwide. Ultrabroadband: 160-250MB/s down and 50MB/s up, commercial 2H09.

Impact of broadband on mobile business strategy? remains tied to legacy bandwidth economics” and is relatively untouched by economics of the Internet: switched to packet (open), shift to IP allows service creation of content service independent of access network. Gateways for media downloads vs mere transporters of bits (diff business models).

How will mobile biz models evolve with broadband? On-demand video, P2P, user-generated content and application downloads will displace basic access services (voice) for new revenue growth. Emerging financial models have more moving parts, less revenue certainty (ad hoc revenue events, on-demand content, connectivity, commissions and revenue sharing). Timing the transition of revenue is important. No “net neutrality” for mobile today.

Who owns what? How will network/device/content/brand/web storefronts evolve as mobile experience? Can mobile operators preserve closed ecosystem? Apple, Nokia, Google on integrated, vertical services. Mobile content without networks, who will build the next Apple store?

Search: speed to the handset is exciting but mobile search needs to evolve too. What is required to crate “meaningful” mobile search and net-centric mobile customers? Today, search is a drag. Contextualize with geography and who you are.

Operational challenges: service delivery involves controlling content thru middleware, or finding a way to stay relevant as consumers download content from off-network sites. Technology (networks, layers, content). Video hits local mobile network.

Can Asian mobile SPs globalize? North Asia is streets ahead of the rest of the world in mobile adoption, but past attempts by Japanese and Korean operators have failed. Big difference: mobile content strategies (opening up services), platform for delivering lifestyle services and knowledge uniquely appropriate to local market. Does network scale have a natural or optimal limit re: services that involve local market knowledge and customization?

What does it mean to create a “mobile Internet?”

YK: Widening world of mobile phones (various data types). DoCoMo’s challenge: communication to info access, life assistance, behavior assistance (personalization of services). Number of mobile phone subscribers growing, Mar ’08 is 102.72M. Ratio of 3G (chart w many countries) is high in Japan.

Frequency chart re: spectrum assignment, present and future (FDD (700-2GHz) and TDD (2-2.5GHz) systems. Devices and Mobile communication systems (illustration). Technology and market trends in Japan all trending higher in all bands, from fixed network services to LTE/Super3G and 4G. Deployment in layers over time, to ultimate status of Super 3G and 4G after 2020.

Trends of Next Gen Systems adopted by Carriers (chart). Change in business models of mobile from vertical integration to open systems (Android, G1 and iPhone, etc.)

JHL: Taiwan mobile market overview: 25.28M mobile users in Nov 2008, penetration 109.8%. Mobile revenue si 59.26% of total telecom market in 2007. Private telecom co, mible WiMax in 2007. Is a full service provider, 97% market share in fixed, mobile 35.5%.

Performance: Netbooks 99% market share, 93% Notebooks and motherboards (chart). Trends and opportunities: fiber to home, LTE/WiMax (converging).

Business model is key: connect to anyone at any time, any place, any devices; ubiquitous network society. Value of networks is proportional to number of subscribers. How could operators realize such value?

SS: The Future of Broadband Mobility

From 10 years ago: fixed broadband. Formed a company then, now sold and doing something else. Now: mobile operator mainly focus on broadband data service (estab. Jan 2005, two directors, lots of outside directors, 3K employees, $4B raised in financing). Now has >1M subscribers. Is different from incumbents: they are mobile company with voice service; his company is mobile broadband service.

Unique biz model: data centric strategy, unique netbook bundling marketing, mobile and fixed bundled service. Efficient network with low running cost, is price leader in mobile broadband service. Not stealing subscribers from incumbents: not stealing voice services, is all data, trending upward.

In PC market, we have created a new demand, “bundled sales of data card and net book.” “Special discounted price: $1-$200 US.” (Net books: ASUS, Acer, Dell, HP, Sony, Toshiba.) Targeting new users by clearly differentiating mobile phones and data. (chart with speed, monthly charge and other: fast speed with low monthly charge.) This is the key.

MT: Four Trends, Fundamental Change (no PowerPoint)

1. Big change in capability of mobile devices. Now powerful processors, versatile radio freq interface that can connect to variety of networks, including phone and data, also makes device mfgrs strategic players.

2. Network layer structure that’s visible to outside world. Implications: service creation not tied to circuit-switched network, or network fabric. Carriers that don’t merely want to carry bits will become app provicers; value on app platforms and tools, resources and tools that can be used.

3. Increasing role of downloading. Mobiles are looking more like the Internet. End-user chooses and uses devices and apps.

4. Emergency of boundary management: boundary between network operator management and outside world, open boundaries. Closed worlds not being successful commercially. Operator has resources at diff layers, other important apps: strong authentication services (to prevent theft of services).

Examples: Eqo (Vancouver) takes over phone book, does dialing via IP network; also provides IM function that is compatible with all major messaging systems.

Devices, Events, Identity, Network, Scenarios broadband, Devices, hand held, handhelds, mobile, mobile phone, net book, platform, PTC09

From http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?site=lightreading&doc_id=65310

Wi-fi IP phones coming to a broadband connection near you:

Vonage Holdings Corp., an upstart company known for pushing the boundaries of IP-based communications, announced today at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas that it has partnered with UTStarcom Inc. (Nasdaq: UTSI – message board) to produce a portable WiFi handset that allows users to access Vonage’s VOIP network from multiple locations. Known as the F-1000, the unit will allow users to “roam from home” and access their Vonage service through 802.11b hotspots (see Vonage Unveils New VOIP Tech ).

Michael Tribolet, executive VP of operations at Vonage, says that the new handset, set for release later this year, will give Vonage users the freedom to access their service while on the go. “This is a great application for travelers, especially international travelers where there tend to be more WiFi hot spots, because it will allow them to stay in contact with communications the way they expect them to be,” Tribolet says.

Tribolet says that there were some technical hurdles that had to be overcome before the company could introduce a WiFi option to its subscribers. “The predominant issue has to do with battery life,” he says. “It’s different than a traditional cell phone which can go into sleep mode. A WiFi handset must always stay awake and be able to search for hotspots. The F-1000 has a battery life of about 100 hours, similar to a standard cordless phone.”

Another issue had to do with reliability and quality. “We’ve wanted to introduce a WiFi product for some time, but the products that were out there didn’t have good enough quality for the consumer market,” Tribolet says. “We finally found a product that gives us the quality and reliability that consumers expect.”

The wireless handset will connect to an existing wireless network out of the box and allow users to begin making calls over their broadband Internet connection right away, using their existing Vonage account. As a user travels to another location (like a Starbucks or their office), the handset will automatically scan for available authorized WiFi networks and connect to them, allowing users to make calls.

Devices open networks

Scheming for a video’d and escrowed future…

When on, it would light a red LED, so anyone present would know they are being recorded. The recording would not be stored locally, but would rather be immediately transmitted via a 2.5G or 3G cellular telephony network to a server. This transmission would be encrypted at the source, and incorporate a space-time stamp (e.g., GPS, or time of flight from three cellular towers). Once in the server, it would be possible for the creator of the video clip to cause it to be served up – but NOT to be edited or replaced – the server would be an escrow server.

There is no viewfinder in Fair Witness. There is no local playback. The lens is wide angle. The video created by fair Witness is not highly produced – it might not be very pleasant to watch, but it would be veridical. And it would be non-alterable, with a provable chain of evidence.

So what kinds of social uses could such a video device and escrow service be put to?

Content, Devices 3G, escrow, evidence, mobileTech, social media, witness

From New Scientist: Copper coated, frequency-tuned, AND lets GSM and 3G cell phone signals through…

A type of wallpaper that prevents Wi-Fi signals escaping from a building without blocking mobile phone signals has been developed by a British defence contractor. The technology is designed to stop outsiders gaining access to a secure network by using Wi-Fi networks casually set up by workers at the office.

Did I mention that you can turn the wallpaper on and off? How fashionable.

Devices, Network filter, security, SOHO nets, wi-fi