According to the Q3 2007 report by Point Topic on broadband download speeds, most of the rest of the world is seeing increases in their download speeds. The United States, continuing in its stagnant trajectory, has broken off from much of the rest of the most industrialized nations and is now lumped in with the Middle East and Africa.

If one picture is worth a thousand words, this one tells it all:

Presented at the 2007 Community Wireless Infrastructure Research Project (CWIRP) Workshop in Toronto, Canada on October 16, 2007, "US Telecommunications: Policy and Fantasy in the 21st Century" takes analyses the implications of four initiatives affecting 21st century telecommunications:

1. Broadband Census of America Act of 2007
2. Community Broadband Act
3. Open Platform requirements of the 700MHz spectrum auction
4. White Space Devices

I'm currently at the 2007 Community Wireless Infrastructure Research Project (CWIRP) Workshop in Toronto, Canada. The Workshop brings together a fantastic group of community wireless practitioners and researchers to swap ideas, research findings, and action plans. Participants include folks from CANARIE, City of Fredericton, City of Toronto, Columbia University, Concordia University, Ethos Wireless Consulting, Île Sans Fil (Montreal), K-Net (Northern Ontario), Ontario Ministry of Government Services, Ottawa Gatineau Wi-Fi, New America Foundation (Wireless Future Program), Pennsylvania State University, Ryerson University, University of San Francisco, University of Toronto, Wireless Nomad, Wireless Toronto, York University, and others. I'm looking forward to a great couple days.

UPDATE01: I was just introduced to International Community Wireless expert, Mimi Gabor -- fantastic lady.

A number of folks have asked me to provide my plenary presentation from the Broadband in Cities and Towns Conference that took place October 30-31, 2007. Better Broadband for Cities and Towns and the Rise of Open Technology explores the explosive growth of community wireless networking around the globe and highlights a half-dozen networks, the implementation of the CAIDA COMMONS Project to interlink participating networks, and emergent open technologies that will shift community networks to a "device as infrastructure" model.

From Harold Feld -- lots of amazingly useful info on the pending 700MHz fiasco/proceedings:

Ya know, I had real hopes that, barring a Petition for Reconsideration or two, I was pretty much done with the 700 MHz auction. Sure, Verizon filed a lawsuit with the DC Circuit, but at least we could sit back and stop worrying about the FCC stuff. And besides, the lawsuit didn't really have much of a chance anyway. So, after a grueling 6 months or so, I thought I could finally relax and turn to something new, like kicking the bejeezus out of the cable monopoly.

Hah.

As recent reports indicate, Verizon has apparently pressed the FCC to “clarify” the C Block conditions. I say “apparently” because Verizon has not actually filed a request for any sort of clarification, reconsideration, or declaratory ruling. Indeed, to my considerable annoyance, it took a modest reprimand from the Wireless Bureau and Martin's staff for Verizon to actually put something in the record vaguely resembling a description of what Verizon's most senior lobbyists actually discussed with the Chairman and his staff. Verizon, meanwhile, vigorously denies they ever asked for reconsideration (and, separately, that it finds the accusation that it violated the ex parte shocking and deeply offensive).

For those of you following the M2Z saga, the latest is that the FCC rejected M2Z's application and is releasing a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to figure out what to do with the band. Here's an article from Network World that provides a good analysis:

From: http://www.networkworld.com

Is free nationwide wireless broadband dead?
Future of the 2155-2175MHz band up for debate

By Brad Reed, Network World, 09/11/07

Much to the dismay of some smaller Internet providers, the fate of the 2155-2175MHz band is still up in the air.

The band, which is unlicensed and unused, has been sought by companies, such as M2Z Networks and NetfreeUS, as a means to provide nationwide wireless broadband services. Each of the two companies had applied separately with the Federal Communications Commission for the rights to operate the band and use it to make a nationwide wireless network. However, the FCC announced Aug. 31 that it was dismissing both applications, and thus leaving the band’s future uncertain.

In a statement supporting the applications’ dismissal, commissioner Michael Copps said that “the proper way to allocate this spectrum in the manner that best serves the public interest is to conduct a general rulemaking.”

He described four different options that the commission should consider for dealing with the band, including opening it up for unlicensed use, designating it as an “open access model that would combine wholesale broadband access and a Carterfone mandate,” using it to create a free nationwide broadband network that would be supported both through advertising revenue and revenue generated from premium service fees and licensing it through an open auction.

In a separate statement, commissioner Jonathan Adelstein expressed frustration with what he said was a lack of progress by the commission in designating rules for the band’s use.

“I’m disappointed that despite the aggressive interest in and availability of this spectrum, the commission is only now expressing intent to seek comment on service rules for this band,” he said.

The companies that filed applications to operate the band haven’t given up, though. Shant Hovnanian, the CEO of Speedus Corp., the managing member of NetfreeUS, says that his company hoped to work with the FCC to shape their decision on the new rules.

“We are hopeful that there’s an expedited process now to establish rules where we could still be victorious in getting our format approved,” says Hovnanian, who wants to see the band used to create a free wireless network that will be funded by advertising. The idea is to make the Internet more like analog radio and television, where people can tune in for free in exchange for being exposed to advertisements.

M2Z CEO John Muleta says he would like to see the commission adopt rules similar to what M2Z had proposed in its application. M2Z’s original proposal would have given the company operating rights for the 2155-2175 MHz band in exchange for developing a nationwide wireless network that the company claimed would have provided free Internet service to 95% of Americans. The network would have operated at a speed of 384Kps, and would have also featured an obscenity filter administered by M2Z’s own National Broadband Radio Service.

Muleta says that while he’s happy to see the FCC undertaking rulemaking sessions for the band, their actions may be too little, too late.

“We’d have welcomed this if they’d started it 15 months ago,” he says. “A lot of the big carriers want to forestall competition, and the longer they make us wait to deliver our services, the better it is for the . . . Americans are dying for broadband, and it’s not that it’s not available, it’s just incredibly expensive. We’re offering a free service that’s being retailed today for $40 to $90 a month.”

Mike Jude, a senior analyst at Nemertes Research, says that his preferred solution for the band would be to open it up for unlicensed use, which he says could open the door for more innovation akin to the early days of citizens’ band radio, which he describes as “a free-for-all that ultimately led to a lot of interesting ideas.” However, he says the prospects for getting the current FCC to make the 2155-2175MHz band unlicensed are grim.

“The FCC has long history of wringing its hands in public, and often what they do is most politically expedient thing, which means going to go through the same traditional auction,” he says. “That seems to be the path of least resistance, and it has a lot of attraction for politicians.”

Sascha Meinrath, the research director for the New America Foundation's Wireless Future Program, says that any of the four options for the band laid out by Copps could be beneficial depending on the details. In particular, the ideas he finds most appealing are either making the 2155-2175 MHz band unlicensed or using it to provide a nationwide broadband service free of charge. However, he sees some potential concerns with some of the proposals laid out by M2Z and NetfreeUS. Obscenity filters such as the one proposed by M2Z, for instance, give him pause.

“You’re either providing Internet access -- and the good, the bad and the ugly that entails -- or you end up becoming a government censor, which has incredibly scary connotations,” he says. “Likewise, how advertising works on a free tier is vitally important. Ads should not be intrusive or end up degrading the user experience.”

Meinrath says that auctioning off the band could be beneficial if it correlates mainly with providers’ abilities to provide free service, and not simply their ability to pay. Among the criteria he’d like to see included in any potential auction are “free tier service speeds, buildout requirements and wholesale/open access.”

“Opening the band up for auction a la the 700 MHz block is probably the worst idea of the lot,” he says. “Let’s have an auction that actually generates benefits that people will directly experience.”

All contents copyright 1995-2007 Network World, Inc. http://www.networkworld.com

I've been mired in a pitched battle between the public interest (to allow the general public to use unlicensed devices on unused TV frequencies) and the National Association of Broadcasters and various massive corporations (who have launched a FUD campaign of epic proportions here in the nation's capital). Just today I learned that NAB and its allies have taken out full-page adds in various press going out to congressional offices claiming that these technologies will destroy TV as we know it. If this claim sounds familiar, it's because it was the same claim used to fight low power FM radio -- a claim that has since been proven to have been a lie.

Here's the latest:

Today the New America Foundation, Media Access Project and leading spectrum engineers filed Reply Comments at the FCC (Docket 04-186) with further evidence demonstrating the feasibility of "smart radio" technology that allows low-power broadband devices to detect and utilize vacant TV channels without causing harmful interference to TV viewers. The FCC is currently completing a rulemaking that could open unused TV band "white space" for unlicensed access.

Broadcasters and wireless microphone makers, which currently utilize less than half of the frequencies reserved exclusively for their industries, have tried to distort a recent FCC report that tested initial prototype devices submitted by Philips Electronics and Microsoft. Today's filing adds both new measurements and a critique of the broadcaster/microphone lobby claims.

"There is no longer any doubt about the feasibility of mobile, low-power devices to detect-and-avoid channels occupied by licensed TV channels or wireless microphone systems," said Michael Calabrese, director of New America's Wireless Future Program. "The remaining challenge for the FCC is to define explicit operating rules to govern device certification, so that America's high-tech industries can embark on the R&D necessary to bring compliant consumer devices to market."

The Reply Comments include the following major points:

* Measurements at the University of Kansas spectrum labs shows that both DTV channels and low-power broadband devices can operate in three consecutive channels with no harmful interference.

* Since the vast majority of wireless microphones are themselves unlicensed devices - and have been using vacant TV channels illegally, yet without complaints of interference - the FCC should offer them no further protection than NAF et al.'s proposal to allow sports, theater, concert and other venues to bar, or require patrons to turn off, mobile broadband devices during their events.

* Although the FCC labs found that White Space devices can operate as close as 2 meters from a DTV without causing interference, the Commission should follow the approach it has used for personal computers and other unlicensed emissions - and assume that at distances less than 10-to-20 meters, consumers can take self-help to remedy interference from a mobile device.

* The broadcast lobby (MSTV/NAB) submitted interference measurements, concerning the ability of devices to detect weak TV signals, that are clearly unreliable and erroneous.

* The Commission should reject the overly conservative detection threshold for weak TV signals proposed by the high-technology White Spaces Coalition (Microsoft, Philips, Dell, Google, et al.) since prohibiting the access to channels with signals from distant TV markets would protect few viewers, but deprive all Americans of broadband services.

Today's filing builds on NAF et al.'s initial Comments, filed August 15, on the FCC/OET Report.

New America's Wireless Future Program develops and advocates policy proposals aimed at achieving universal and affordable wireless broadband access, expanding public access to the airwaves and updating our nation's communications infrastructure in the digital era. For more information, visit www.spectrumpolicy.org.

Here's a great clip from my good friend Ben Scott, Policy Director of Free Press:

Ben explains in 5 minutes why the AT&T/iPhone exclusive contract is bad for consumers, innovation, and the general public.

As many folks know, my background is in quantitative statistics. When the Lancet came out with a second study on the number of deaths in Iraq, George Bush dismissed the report stating, "I don't consider it a credible report...the methodology is pretty well discredited." George Bush's response fascinating me since the Lancet is one of the most well-respected medical journals in the world and it seemed quite unlikely that it would publish scientific analysis that didn't pass peer review, and the peer review is pretty damn rigorous.

So I decided to take a look myself at the Lancet report. First, the authors used a random sampling of 50 "clusters" (controlling for population density) that would provide both the statistic power and 95% confidence interval to determine whether there was, at least, a doubling of the death rate post-invasion. In each of the 50 clusters, 40 households were interviewed by medical doctors.

The results from the interviews were quite stunning, and the information was broken down in Table 2 of the study. Most stunningly, while violent deaths composed 2% of the total deaths pre-invasion, violent deaths made up a full 55% of total deaths post-invasion.

Read more...

The OECD today released June 2006 statistics on international broadband penetration rates. Here in the US, the best that can be said is that our international ranking has continued to stagnate (just as I reported earlier this year).

I'm very much hoping that the penetration rate by population density graph will be linkable soon -- it certainly brings home the point that population density and broadband do not correlate well. In the meantime, here's the findings (note that broadband appears to be any service faster than 256k -- which would be a very poor measure of "broadband", but might explain why the US is placed ahead of Japan):

Read more...