Tiered Internet service

If you have been around the blogs or the technology news websites, you would have seen that Time-Warner Cable has finally begun their tiered Internet testing in Texas.

First, I would like to applaud TWC for taking this step in my own way. *Golf claps*. Seriously though at least TWC is attempting to find a solution to a potentially bad problem.

Time for the criticism. Most of us don't know how much data we transmit in any given month. The service in Texas does provide a metering device to track the usage, but where did the 40GB number come into play as the limit? I cannot say for certain, because I really have no idea what my data download statistics are, but 40GB seems fairly small. Especially when TWC is also including uploading traffic in the data count. What about advertising, sure it may be small amounts, but why should ISP subscribers pay for advertisements? Especially the annoying advertisements that pop up and slide across your screen, not allowing you to accurately hit the 'close' option? These are some smaller, perhaps even trivial aspects that have not been fully explored. Hopefully that the TWC experiment will allow that exploration and for adjustments.

Generally for any ISP exploring pay-per-byte(PPB)...

My understanding is that there is an issue with network management and that certain people are, perhaps, abusing or taking full advantage of a system. For me I am wanting some sort of trade-off from the ISPs. If consumers can move to pay-per-byte with hard limits, from pay-per-month with few limits, what is left to bargain with other than the guarantee of service levels. Part of the reason this is being tested is to examine network effects and hopefully cut down on the high bandwidth users. If consumers make that trade, then there should be some return for their business rather than restrictions on downloads .

Wouldn't it be nice?

As I read the reports from varying blogs about the recent FCC meeting at Harvard, I tend to become jealous. Of the recent past, most important policy matters and open hearings take place on either one of the coasts. Rarely does the government solicit input from the rest of the country. You know the "fly over" states.

This comes to my mind after reading the reports that Comcast paid for people to attend the FCC meeting. Yes, I agree completely that paying for a person to attend a government policy event is akin to voter fraud. However, at least someone got to attend the meeting while the rest of us are left out. Out in the middle of the nation.

The point that I am attempting to pice together is that policy meetings such as these should not have limits to those that may attend. If a room fills, move to another facility. The University of Oklahoma has learned this lesson really well, when a visitor such as Al Gore and his global warming speech come to campus. The other real question to ask is why did the FCC only have one meeting? Why were there only a limited number of people allowed?

I am not convinced Comcast destroyed the democratic process of this meeting, I was not there and have not seen the proverbial smoking gun. Maybe the FCC destroyed the democratic process by excluding those that showed up at Harvard or those of us who live in the rest of the nation. Maybe the FCC should go to the people in more than one instance.

The blogs are going crazy...

Today it seems that the ICT policy blogs and Internet blogs are going crazy with news about Connect Kentucky. I believe the original article is here, as I said the blogs are going crazy.

The debates and opinions, to put it nicely, seem to claim that Connect Kentucky is a sham. Some go so far to claim that several pesidential candidates are in league with telecommunications companies. Read what you can and make your own conclusions.

The silly thing about all of this is that there is currently a bill, H.R. 3919 , that will inventory broadband penetration. Perhaps more effort should be put into H.R. 3919, than polarizing Internet policy by political party.

Latest FCC meeting shows need for better data collection

The FCC decided that in order to make an informed decisions further data was needed on the penetration and access of cable television services in the US. Apparently the cable service providers have 60 days to provide the FCC with this information. This recent need for better data on communications penetration and access shows how important bills such as the H.R. 3919, Broadband Census of America Act of 2007.
Though H.R. 3919 is geared towards showing broadband Internet access penetration, the same methods can be used to obtain cable television data.

U.S. Broadband Map

H.R. 3919 , Broadband Census Act of America of 2007, sets out to map out the service areas of broadband Internet access across the U.S. In the current language of the bill, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration of the Department of Commerce would collect data down to the 9-digit zip code or census tract level. The bill would also survey consumers as to several aspects of broadband service in their area.

The fact that this bill is now being introduced is a positive step. Positive in that such a broadband inventory can encourage competition by ISPs. The identification of underserved potential customers or wholly ignored areas open to new development could provide a catalyst for increasing broadband Internet access. When broadband Internet access saturation occurs, a broadband map will prove useful to identify further markets open to competition based on prices and speeds available to consumers and businesses.

The bill can also provide information for new residents about services. I know that before I move, typical transitory college student, one of the first questions I ask a landlord is whether broadband Internet access is available. Many times they do not know, and I am left with the duty of going to all the various big name ISPs to see if they offer service in which area. With such a map, a person could cut down the time spent researching for an answer to this question and at the same time see pricing and speed options. (At least the current information for when the map and survey were last conducted, which is to be annually).

Another use for this map is to provide data concerning broadband accessibility, geography, and demography. The data could be used in many imaginative ways. One could be the correlation between broadband accessibility and population income or whether remoteness and low population density are underlying characteristics of communities that do not have access to broadband Internet connectivity.

I would urge that the bill define broadband in terms to the current accepted use of the word. Instead of using the Federal Communication Commission’s 200Kbps speed, I would suggest that a minimum speed in the Mbps, perhaps 5Mbps, be used as a defining characteristic with a separate notation for non-broadband access, say through dial-up access in which speeds are slower than 5Mbps. Of course the 5Mbps was picked at random, but with 10Mbps speeds available in my area, I think 5Mbps would be a nice speed as a minimum.

First wireless nation: Macedonia

It appears that an unlikely award has been bestowed upon a Mediterranean nation this year. Macedonia has been able to install a wireless network across the nation. Though this feat was not done alone, it is a marvelous step for Macedonia.

In the U.S. it seems to be the policy of the federal government and its agencies to allow for the market to spread Internet access across the nation. That is why in the U.S. there are 'pockets' of broadband connectivity. Usually these 'pockets' are in proximity to locations of denser population. The reason, in order for the communication company to make profits it must be present in areas with potential to create profits. In short it is more profitable, thus doable, to connect a city of 500,000 people for broadband connectivity than a town of 5,000. Gradually as market saturation increases in the larger population locations, broadband connectivity will filter out to less populated, less profitable areas of the U.S.; thus is my understanding.

The confusing point of this post centers on why monies and support from USAID was used for what is not done in the U.S.? Why is it that the U.S. can instigate a national broadband policy, however indirectly, in Macedonia, but not in the U.S.? Yes, the U.S. is much larger and perhaps better off with regards to infrastructure to support Internet connectivity, but why would USAID sponsor the development of high speed connection of schools, rural governments and populations in Macedonia, but not the U.S.? Maybe the US is using Macedonia as a testing ground for a national broadband policy? Congratulations are in order for Macedonia, for becoming the first nation with universal Internet access.

Public Library Funding & Technology Access Study 2006-2007

Over the weekend I finally found the time to read the very interesting "Library Funding & Technolgy Access Study 2006-2007". Yes the title sounds a bit drab, but within this study is a great deal of information. Especially information that is pertinent to persons interested in ICT Policy and Telecommunications Policy.

In the ICT arena, the study highlights the shortcomings that public libraries are encountering with budgets and physical infrastructure of buildings. In addition to the lack of information professionals for support and improvment of ICT that is already in place. This is occuring when the use of public libraries is increasing, ICT equipment is becoming outdated, bandwidth is beoming maxed out, and budgets are decreasing for public libraries.

The Telecommuniations Policy is brought into the fold with the introduction of bandwidth limits at public libraries. Granted some of the bandwidth limitations are in place voluntarily, but my focus here is that there are some that cannot obtain greater bandwidth due to insufficient infrastructure in the geographical region. This introduces the topic that the U.S. needs a Telecommunications policy that benefits everyone, not only those people that reside in areas where telecommunication companies can make a profit.

There is also so much more information contained in the study, that I would urge even the lonely librarian to devle into its massive 200+ pages. However, many of those pages are charts and graphs.