Trump Team Considers Nationalizing America's 5G Network (axios.com)

JoeyRox writes: "Trump national security officials are considering an unprecedented federal takeover of a portion of the nation's mobile network to guard against China, according to sensitive documents obtained by Axios." This is based on a PowerPoint presentation Axios has in their possession. Two options are described -- a national 5G network funded and built by the Federal government, or a mix of 5G networks built by existing wireless providers. A source suggests the first option is preferred and essential to protect against competition from China and "bad actors". The presentation suggests that a government-built network would then be leased out to carriers like AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile.
The PowerPoint presentation was produced by a senior National Security Council official, and argues that the move is necessary because "China has achieved a dominant position in the manufacture and operation of network infrastructure," and "China is the dominant malicious actor in the Information Domain."

It also suggests America could export its secure 5G technology to protect its allies, and "Eventually this effort could help inoculate developing countries against Chinese neo-colonial behavior."

Comments

Good

[sexconker]

This would in theory make carriers compete for customers everywhere, and increase signal availability and quality for everyone.

Re:Good

[GerryGilmore]

I agree! This nonsense of selling spectrum to the deepest pocketed existing carrier should end. Let the government build out the network and lease - at RAND pricing - capacity to those carriers ready, willing and able to do so in any given area. I'm a dyed-in-the-wool Capitalist Pig(TM) and proud of it, but - you know - pigs get fat and hogs (existing carriers) get slaughtered. As they deserve to be...

Re:Good

[bigwheel]

While I normally cringe at the having the government in control of things, this seems like a good idea to me too. Information routes, like roadways, should be something that the government provides to its citizens, rather than having much of the country at the whim of one or two carriers, who happen to own and control the spectrum. Plus, it pulls some of the Net Neutrality concerns off of the table.

It will be interesting to see how they plan to pay for it.

Re:Good

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds more like something that will be another big government project boondoggle, but nonetheless a nice way for Trump and fellow Congress cronies to funnel money to some of their friends and backers to build out this network.

I hate Trump more than most, but this seems on the face a good idea. That is not to say the federal government won't screw it up.

In short, spectrum is finite. You want phones to be as simple as possible to cut costs, so having everyone share the same hopefully fairly large set of spectrum makes sense. They just need to have every company leasing out fractions of cells on an as needed basis. You might need an additional penalty of you leased space for a month and never used it, just to avoid companies tying up spectrum.

Spectrum in remote areas might be cheap, or possibly more expensive, if it is used in place of real broadband.

I'm not sure I buy the security angle though. Phones are likely fast enough to encrypt conversations end to end real time, but maybe our government doesn't want to implement that :)

Re:Good

[Anonymous Coward]

I like the analogy to the freeway system.

Good broadband should be available all over the USA, just like the postal service and the highway system. It will make rural communities relevant again.

Re:Good

[Freischutz]

You're making a big assumption: The government can implement the network competently.

Consider healthcare.gov.

That is a double edged argument. There are plenty of examples from all over the world where private enterprise took over previously government owned and operated road & rail grids, water supply systems, electric grids, communications grids, public real estate assets, etc ... that gave these private parties an effective monopoly. They then let then let these things fall apart through lack of maintenance and investment while effectively taxing the hell out of citizenry. That last part is what has effectively happened in the US mobile and internet service sectors. The telcos have divvied the country up into competition free fiefdoms and are taxing the hell out of the citizenry for totally sub standard service. If I'm going to be taxed by anybody I'd prefer it be the government because I can oust those bozos every four years by voting them out out of office. Ousting corporate oligarchs takes billions of dollars and a hostile takeover.

Extraordinarily bad idea

[WaffleMonster]

Placing government in control of a 5G network everyone uses grants government means of directly tracking high resolution movements of everyone everywhere in real time. Hard to come up with a worse more dangerous idea than this one.

This would in theory make carriers compete for customers everywhere, and increase signal availability and quality for everyone.

What would be better is framework for allowing competing carriers to dynamically share spectrum completely doing away with exclusive grants.

Allowing multiple carriers to use the same frequencies is technically feasible with next gen technology and opens up means to competition rather than allowing only those with the deepest pockets to win spectrum auctions.

Re:Chinese neo-colonial behavior?

[PopeRatzo]

But this is the kicker:

It also suggests America could export its secure 5G technology to protect its allies,

You might want to ask our allies what it means to them when America comes to "protect" them. It usually means a body count. Ask Europe, North Africa and Southeast Asia.

The Serbians have a saying that translated means, "When American comes to help, find a hole and crawl in." It's more colorful in their language and contains references to one's mother's private parts, but that's Serbians for you.