Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : The *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ftth who wrote (21623)	5/25/2007 10:02:54 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Respond to of 46821

Whether it's worth all this toil bringing the 700MHz model forward has been on my mind, as well, as has WiFi, with respect to its ability to keep pace with evolving applications, too. Although, WiFi does have a roadmap that will accommodate some level of upgrade in the future. Whether that margin of upgrade will do much good for cities and towns that have already shot their wads on 802.11b is another question, but for still-to-be implemented networks, they should, to whatever extent they are specified. We differed only slightly through our use of metaphor, since I don't view the potential of 700MHz being trapped in dial up mode. Instead, I think of it simply as being trapped in how the FCC has historically qualified "broadband" all along, i.e., =/> 200 kbps in either direction ;)

To: ftth who wrote (21623)	5/25/2007 3:21:13 PM
From: axial	Respond to of 46821

Right on. There's a lot of circularity in our discussions. Whether A is true depends on whether B and C are also true. If C, but not B is true, then A can be true, partially true, possibly irrelevant, or false. And so on, thru D, E, F and the rest. In my view the Test Bed concept is a good idea, and a necessary first step. I haven't seen any debate on the idea itself, but rather, discussion has focused on the motivations, aspirations and possible implementations of the respondents. But (making a leap here) many of the questions we've been discussing have their roots in the absence of good policy. An example would be Frank's comments on linking RF networks to available fibre, mostly held by incumbents. At incumbency, the discussion shifts from the technology itself to the commercial alliances, and their "visions" for the future: which visions we presume would include their own profit. (*See next post). Somewhere there should be a disembodied overview of such futures in the public and national interest. That view is conspicuously absent. The FCC's Test Bed has turned into a dogfight. In the absence of overview policy and guidance, what else could we expect? The fight has no ring, no ropes, and no rules. The referee's criteria (referee being the FCC) are determined by any one of several possible interpretations of the Telecomms Act; as you state, any decision will be opposed by someone. Is it the regulator's mandate to create and implement telecomms policy? Or is that a political mandate? So we see the FCC bravely forging ahead into no-win territory. Jim

To: ftth who wrote (21623)	5/27/2007 6:28:24 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Respond to of 46821

No doubt, the test bed approach has merit, as Jim also agreed. The dangers I see can be found in precedents, however, where the grassroots component and the larger marketplace are both removed from the equation, favoring specifications of top-tier vendors and service providers, eventually leading them to be government-sanctioned, thus again precluding innovation and freedom to use technologies without always having to ask permission. It doesn't start out that way, but that's where it sometimes goes, usually following the leads of large vendor- and, er.. service provider- (I almost erred by using the term "common carrier") trade associations, which is how most new standards are created. While I don't have a well thought-out alternative, I saw a need to highlight the other side of this coin. "Let's say hypothetically that all incumbents were banned from the auction. Was the lack of tiny 700MHz channels of spectrum really the missing ingredient in the broadband equation in the US? Even if all the 700MHz spectrum was mandated to be wholesale-only, open access, and all the other things incumbents hate, does it really solve anything longer term?" Good point. I wonder if would you feel the same if a different band were in question, possibly even preferring it, say, if it supported less reach, and reduced permeability, but a higher degree of reusability, even at the sacrifice of much shorter distances? ------

To: ftth who wrote (21623)	5/30/2007 9:16:42 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Respond to of 46821

Your next generation dialup network? I can't help increasingly thinking so, given the increased demands of today's Internet applications, which have grown far greater than the hoped-for increases in speeds in cityscale WiFi, especially those afforded by the grades of service that would be extended to low-income households. But, as they say, we shall see. There is one sign that doesn't bode so well, however, and that is, cities are no longer stipulating, to the degree they once did, what they anticipate in the way of throughput rates, especially for the low-income scale - and when they do, they are generally qualified statements, at best. --- Philadelphia Wireless Internet Project Advances PHILADELPHIA (Reuters)—Philadelphia has finished testing its wireless Internet project, setting the stage for America's biggest citywide Wi-Fi network that will also offer access to low-income households, officials said on Thursday. feeds.ziffdavis.com The city government this week approved results from a 15-square-mile test zone where people can access the Internet for $21.95 a month or $9.95 if they qualify for low-income assistance. Access is free in parks and other outdoor spaces, and for people participating in community programs such as employment training or housing assistance. By the end of this year, Philadelphia will have wireless Internet access throughout its 135 square miles in a project being watched by many cities throughout the world, said Greg Goldman, chief executive of Wireless Philadelphia, a nonprofit organization set up by the city to implement the plan. Although other cities have wireless "hotspots," no other U.S. city as large as Philadelphia has total Wi-Fi coverage, Goldman said. "This is a major step toward achieving our vision of the entire city connected," Goldman said. "Low-income families can begin using the powers of the Internet to improve their educational, employment and life opportunities." Wireless Philadelphia aims to provide Internet access for the more than 300,000 households—about half of the city—that cannot currently get on the Web, and so are unable to perform basic economic activities such as applying for jobs whose employers only accept online applications, Goldman said. Philadelphia, with a quarter of its 1.5 million people officially below the federal poverty line, is one of the poorest U.S. cities. For 2,000 of the neediest customers, Wireless Philadelphia plans to provide free refurbished laptops, a one-year Wi-Fi account, and educational and technical support in a program that will cost $3 million once funds are raised, Goldman said. The network is being funded, built and managed by Earthlink, an Atlanta-based Internet provider, which plans to invest $13.5 million to complete the project. The company will pay revenue-sharing fees to Wireless Philadelphia to support its "digital inclusion" project for low-income users. ------