Slashdot Mirror
White House, FCC Unveil 5G Push and $20B Fund For Rural Broadband (cnet.com)
The White House on Friday will unveil a new 5G push to position the US ahead of global rivals in the race to deploy the next-generation wireless technology. President Donald Trump and Federal Communications Chairman Ajit Pai will announce new airwaves auctions and plans to spend $20.4 billion over 10 years on rural broadband. From a report: The FCC will auction off three segments of millimeter-wave spectrum -- which can offer insane data speeds but has limited range -- for commercial use. The auction is scheduled for December, FCC Chairman Ajit Pai said on a conference call with reporters ahead of the White House event. He said the FCC plans to auction off 3,400 MHz of spectrum in three different high-frequency bands. "This will be the largest spectrum auction in American history," he said. Pai went onto say that this auction, along with others planned for the future, are putting the US on a good path. "The US is well-positioned to take a lead in 5G," he said.
The FCC is also announcing the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund. The agency plans to reallocate $20.4 billion from its Universal Service Fund over the next 10 years to subsidize eligible companies to build out broadband infrastructure in underserved areas. The money will be allocated to internet service providers that can provide a minimum of 25 megabit per second downloads in areas that are currently in need of connectivity, Pai said. He added that the new infrastructure will also help bring 5G to these rural areas. "There are a number of startups that are working on millimeter wave technology to bring 5G to rural America," he said on the call.
The FCC is also announcing the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund. The agency plans to reallocate $20.4 billion from its Universal Service Fund over the next 10 years to subsidize eligible companies to build out broadband infrastructure in underserved areas. The money will be allocated to internet service providers that can provide a minimum of 25 megabit per second downloads in areas that are currently in need of connectivity, Pai said. He added that the new infrastructure will also help bring 5G to these rural areas. "There are a number of startups that are working on millimeter wave technology to bring 5G to rural America," he said on the call.
Why can't they build their own rural coops and do it themselves using private enterprise?
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
BOO for killing high frequency S band weather radars in the US.
The White House on Friday will unveil a new 5G push to position the US ahead of global rivals in the race to deploy the next-generation wireless technology. President Donald Trump and Federal Communications Chairman Ajit Pai will announce new airwaves auctions and plans to spend $20.4 billion over 10 years on rural broadband.
And here I thought the Republican Party was the party of free trade, competition, small government and fiscal responsibility that cannot abide the sight of subsidies?!? Shouldn't we go easy on the irresponsible payments of subsidies and instead wait and watch the always rational, invisible hand of the free market fix the rural broadband problem?
America does not make the 5G equipment. Are we buying from Europe, or China, specifically, Huawei? Also interesting that Trump/GOP want to subsidize this when multiple sats are about to come on-line with 1G bandwidth with 20 ms pings across the globe and for under $70/month.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
There are a number of startups that are working on millimeter wave technology to bring 5G to rural America
Because the established telecoms can't be bothered to invest directly? Maybe they all need more tax breaks and subsidies so that they can compete on buying those start ups when the infrastructure templates are ready.
All these predominantly conservative voters are takers and on the government dole. Why should we, liberal makers, continue feed the vicious cycle of dependency? They should roll up their sleeves and build their own god-damn broadband internet instead of asking us to pay for it.
"There are a number of startups that are working on millimeter wave technology to bring 5G to rural America,"
Well, it was stated right in the summary that 5G has limited range. Good luck covering any area that is classified as "rural" with 5G.
The last mile of 5G will be provided my micro cells covering at most a few hundred meters (that is a quarter of a mile, at most).
Moo.
solved, and it will only cost you a billion. your welcome US government. Sorry US telcos that wanted to gorge themselves on that trough (again).
If the US Government was directing a ton of money to a space based internet system run by SpaceX or Amazon, one would imagine /. community would go crazy with people yelling about unfair subsidies. But somehow if the same money gets dropped in AT&T/Verizon's lap it's ok? Despite the fact that these legacy telcos haven't done crap for rural broadband...ever. And indeed tend to fight community based providers that try and pick up the slack.
Your asses are going to be fried. What do you need to get that is a huge file on your phone that you couldn't get on WiFi sa afely? 4g is already fast enough to grab a blu-ray rip by the time you have time to grab a snack and drink from a store then apparently sit in your car away from anybody with wifi available to watch it. You can stream whatever in Starbucks already on WiFi if your 4g is bad reception.
The waves put out from 5g smash on your DNA. You really need to stream that hour of Wendy Williams Show while sitting in your car 25 miles from stores in the woods... in 5g/4k ?
They are just selling. Your fault if you buy and fry.
Something like this was provided in my home state. Fraud allegations are flying. Smart business or poor management of funds? you decide.
A local phone/internet provider VTEL received $116 million in state money to provide Wireless Internet to all the undeserved (aka the last mile). They built the Wireless towers but only 1200 people have service. Why? Just because there's a tower doesn't mean the signal reaches a house. The home may be 'round the edge of a mountain ridge or in a forest. Of those 1200 with service, many report okay quality until it rains or snows which causes quality to be more like dial-up.
A federal program to do the same will line the pockets of the smart corps. The incentive needs to be paid for each customer signed up. In the VTEL case they were awarded money to build the infrastructure, and around here $116 million is a lot of $$ per person. There's just barely 600k people in the whole state and this corner of state in question has very very low population. I can see needing investment money to build the infrastructure because it is expensive. However, the goal of the program is to get people online. And I think that needs to be a large part of the stick/carrot.
https://www.vnews.com/Money-Is...
Russia needed broadband to brainwash and will have USA pay for it!
The little details are VERY important. What happens when they don't provide universal coverage, yet took money to provide it?
The FCC needs an independent inspector general, independent of the board and chairman, to keep then honest.(or rather, to
make their actions accountable.)
Every time the government throws money at telecommunications companies to build broadband in underserved remote areas, it disappears and nothing changes. Every single time. It's almost like every cent of the funds winds up in the pockets of investors or something. It's so weird! I mean, we have that Universal Service Fund thing, right? What ever happened to that?
Stop falling for this crap, America. Either take control of your telecommunications industry like a real developed country or stop throwing public cash at it, because they're never going to change as long as there are no real consequences for failure.
I was an executive 10 years ago in a telco which received significant amounts of government money to build out rural services. What did we do with some of this money? We used it to fight municipalities that were trying to build out their own locally managed Internet services. We employed a sizable number of lobbyists in DC to guarantee this annual revenue stream. The problem is worse than you imagine.
Back when Bill Clinton was president, the U.S. government provided ISPs with billions of taxpayer dollars to build out the internet infrastructure in this country. ISPs promised that within a decade, consumers would have 45/45 Mbps network speeds for a low price (can't remember the figure).
Almost three decades later, the vast majority of people either can't get 45Mbps (download only), let alone 45 up, or the cost is not low.
Now we're being told if we hand over more billions of our dollars, private industry will do what they said they would do those three decades ago.
I wouldn't hold my breath.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Isn't that right WindBourne.
You're clueless as ever. Or at least paid to appear totally clueless, not sure which is worse.
Are we buying from Europe, or China, specifically, Huawei?
Do you seriously not follow any news at all?
You have no clue at all do you.
Apparently you:
1. think white people are bad.
2. think Christians are bad.
2. think white Christians are inbred.
wow.
Would you have presumed, and had the guts to post, that black Muslims are bad and inbred, or that yellow Buddhists are bad and inbred?
They need to quit giving all this $$$ to companies who's only interest is to take that money, deliver on a minimal amount of work then stall/delay anything further until it fades from memory (or the party in charge changes, etc.) and instead give it to the local EMCs to deploy FTTH to all the homes in their service area and give them a monopoly on service, similar to how they deliver power now. Rural areas are an exclusion to just about every rule, it's simply too expensive to really turn a profit, so companies that supposedly are there to serve rural areas, just take the money and run (here's looking at you Windstream). In my personal experience, I'm still using the same 1.5Mbps Windstream DSL that I had installed in 2006 when I built my home. If I call them now to see about upgrades, they actually do not offer the service I get, so I can either keep what I have or I can do without it. The local EMC in my county got a grant several years ago to start installing FTTH but on a very limited scale and recently they borrowed money to try to expand it but from what I've heard, they are struggling to keep it in the black. Its really hard to fight against the (essentially) free money that the competitor in the area (Windstream) is getting from the USF and then not really using it for what they are supposed to (of which I can attest). If this kind of money was provided to the EMCs to just get the job done then this would probably be a moot point, however it never happens because the commercial carriers do not want their cookie jar taken away.
He thinks cars will be all electric in just 2 years time