The new fedgov stimulus bill was signed into law and it contains $6.3 billion to expand broadband in the United States. Hooray! The problem of Internet access in the United States is solved, right?
Hah! Not by a long-shot.
The U. S. is 15th in the world in broadband penetration. And our primary technologies used for broadband are still cable modems and phone companies' Digital Subscriber Link (DSL). Cable modems give relatively high speed - 6 to 30 megabits per second, but that speed is shared among dozens or hundreds of households. And it is typically much slower "upload" rather than download. DSL gives a dedicated connection to each user, but still, typically, at relatively low speeds such as 1, 2 or 7 megabits per second, and, again, much slower on the upload rather than download.
Now, you might think "gee a million bits a second is really fast". Yes, yes it is, if you are reading static websites or doing e-mail. But the future of the "net" is video - and not the grainy, jerky (no pun intended), YouTube variety, but HDTV. And HDTV requires 6 megabits per second each way. Read on ...
Most developed nations deploying "broadband" are NOT doing cable modems or coax or DSL or copper. They are deploying fiber optic cable to each household and business. S eoul and Tokyo have deployed. Amsterdam and Paris and Venice and Singapore are deploying.
A few forward thinking cities in the United States are - on their own - also deploying fiber to each premise. Lafayette, Louisiana, Clarksville and Chattanooga and Pulaski and Jackson Tennessee are examples. (See a great map of fiber deployments here.)
The beauty of fiber broadband is really high speed - 100 megabits-per-second or more, and true, two-way, symmetric networking. These are networks capable of downloading whole movies in HDTV in a few minutes. Or networks which can stream two-way HDTV so that every home/business can be an HDTV studio or a video conference/telework center or give people a phenomenal new Internet gaming experience.
Think about working at home, and joining meetings via HDTV video conference with quality so great you can actually watch your co-workers sweating. With HDTV quality you can actually participate! Or how about having your high school kid join a virtual HDTV classroom for that college-credit advanced placement class. Or having your grandparents join you and their grandkids for dinner - several nights a week - using HDTV. Think of the difference in their lives (maybe NOT yours!). These same networks can be used to manage the energy use and carbon footprint of homes and businesses and buildings. These are networks capable of telehealth and telemedicine - visiting your nurse or doctor from home and they can SEE you in HDTV.
And what will the fedgov broadband stimulus deliver? Well, there is $2.5 billion for broadband to "rural areas" via the Department of Agriculture's Rural Utilities Services.
In terms of urban areas, a lot of the requirements are still to be determined before $4.7 billion in stimulus grants are awarded. The funds need to be spent in unserved or underserved areas. But what does that mean? Compared to the fiber deployments being undertaken elsewhere in the world, most places in the United States - other than those served by Verizon FIOS - are "underserved" because we only have DSL and cable. How fast is this proposed stimulus-funded broadband? Is it 256kb per second, or a megabit or 100 megabits? Is it symmetric or is a very slow upload speed acceptable?
The fedgov NTIA ( National Telecommunications Infrastructure Administration) has published in the Federal Register an extensive list of such questions for us all to answer to help design their program.
I certainly hope this great new stimulus package will not just try to extend DSL or cable Internet and call that "broadband". I hope the NTIA and Agriculture stay true to the Obama administration's goals of being bold, inventive, and innovative. And, with this broadband stimulus, they don't try to make the United States a "better" third world nation in terms of broadband, but rather sponsor projects which show the way for the future of a truly high-speed, two-way-HDTV-networked world.
Subscribe to this blog's feed
Your efforts to bring high speed internet to us "rural" users is applauded! Here's a couple of questions for you:
1. How does one person, not living in a rural "community" ever get noticed when it comes to the grants available to bring DSL to us? I am one of those who lives not in a community, but in the true rural area of the county.
2. I now have satellite internet, expensive and painfully slow (but worlds better than the previous dial-up I had!). I have three choices - WildBlue, HughesNet, and without! If I can get satellite TV signals, why can't internet be provided at a comparable speed? I know if my satellite TV signal ran as slow as my internet signal, I could not watch TV for the jerky reception!! What gives?
Again, thanks for being a voice for us underserved users trying to save money by working from home on less than efficient means.
I, like C Davidson, live in a "true rural" area. I had Wildblue but dumped it because every time there was a cloud in the sky, I lost service. Currently, I am using AT&T "aircard", receiving better service than dial-up, not as fast as the most expensive ($80. mo) Wildblue, but at least I have service when it's cloudy.
My job, as a data/GIS mgr, allows me to periodically work from home. Concessions must be made to the amount of work I can send/receive because of the limitations of my wireless service. There are others in the area who need a better internet service than dial-up, but it is not a number that makes it economical to run fiber.
We should not be jeopardized in this manner because we have chosen to live outside of the insanity of "town" or the city.
As soon as something better is available, all of us rural "techies", as well as our "un-connected" neighbors will jump all over it. Let us know what we can do to help expedite the process.
Same story here...I live in the country also...the nearest town is 8 miles away, across the Gasconade river. I dont know if that is contributing to our lack of high speed internet or not, some folks further "in the woods" than I am have dsl service. I have called, emailed, and written to Embarq (now CenturyLink) to try and find out when and if us "forgotten" people will be brought up to speed. I can' get a straight answer to anyone... Terms like "per linear mile" and cost efficiency" come up. Seems to me that the phone company would like to keep us rural customers by upgrading our speed somehow. The way it is now, several of us in this neck of the woods are contemplating getting one of the "air cards" or getting Hughes net and dropping our land lines altogether. After all, I think some money coming in every month is better than none at all. I know I am rambling, I hope I make some sense. I am tired of being left behind in a high speed world.