Slashdot Mirror
The 700MHz Question
mstrchf07 writes "The FCC will soon be auctioning off the rights to use the 700MHz spectrum for wireless communications, with the winner being able to choose the direction of wireless services development in the US. With stakes this high, is the playing field fair, and are business needs trumping consumer and technological interests?"
just like early years of internet. some source that is open and free should take custody of it until it is no longer vulnerable.
Read radical news here
I would have loved to see a horse race with the entertainment conglomerates, google and the telcos. Sadly, the entertainment conglomerates can't see the forest through the trees and would abuse consumers just as much as the telcos.
Telcos win, consumers lose. Same story different day.
Got Trader Joe's? friendwich.com RSS feeds work now!
I think the most realistic case for Google getting into this is not as a regular WISP, but as a "Wireless Google Service Provider". That is, free wireless access to Google and related services (and companies who have paid them) via their spectrum, and not general internet access (you can already pay your cell phone company for that, as many have pointed out). Then, Google either generates sufficient hype/pressure/etc. to get cell phone manufacturers to add support for this new spectrum & service (and wifi, etc.) into their phones, or sells unlocked Google-capable cell phones directly that you just put your carrier's SIM card in. Oh, also Google partners with Apple to help Apple escape AT&T's control of the iPhone.
Once there is enough revenue/reason to justify it, other spectrum (or the incumbents themselves) can be bought.
A very good point. Maybe the FCC should not allow those big telcos who already are sitting on leased airwaves from bidding any further, leave it to some new companies instead. Let them run with what they have now, improve that, and let some others pull up a chair to the wireless table.
I also think they should drastically reduce the hoop jumping and expense for lower power broadcasting, open that up as well, commercial or not for profit, it doesn't matter, we have good tech now that would allow a lot more stations on a smaller community basis rather than just extending a few conglomerates power.
In the early days of commercial radio, the AM radio commercial broadcast stations were limited to 50k watts due to the networks (Mutual CBS NBC) hammering down one station (WLW; Crosley Brodcasting) which had a 200kw transitter and could run advertising cheaper and guarantee a greater audiance share. In like manner the commercial interests today will hammer any tech edge anyone develops. The someone will get the idea of setting up a huge broadcast farm in Tijuana pointed north....
- Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
So, you're saying it's not in the interest of our government to rebuild the port city on the largest river in our country?
If it's so damned profitable, then businesses should be willing to rebuild there. And the local government there should collect the taxes it needs in order to build some proper levees, and if these taxes are too high for the businesses to exist, then it's not damned profitable enough. It's one of those "return on investment" deals. If the dollars aren't there, then it isn't worth it -- have these people move and be industrious elsewhere.
It's not in government's interest to invest in infrastructure?
In international, interstate infrastructure, probably. But the state government usually handles state roads, right?
I agree with you on our ridiculous defense budget.
Buy filters so no nipples or curse words are sent over the airwaves?