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.
BOO for killing high frequency S band weather radars in the US.
It's much more expensive to do that in underserved / rural areas, and that's exactly what the Universal Service Fund was designed to help with.
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.
The cost doesn't change, but the USF was established so that it could help defray those costs.
yes, but not needed.
4G is already there, and sats are coming with decent speeds/times. So, better to use 4G for phones and let the sats(or the phone companies) compete for rural broadband.
What I find interesting is that the feds can happily subsidize RBOCS, etc to compete against true free enterprise, and oppose local govs from doing fiber as utility.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
The fact is, that the USF already exists, and unless the laws change, it's not going away. So why not use it for its intended purpose?
As far as market forces doing it better and cheaper, they haven't. The very fact that even Republicans at this point are advocating use of the fund for helping with some of the costs bears that out.
There you go. See, we already paid for it.
Cancel the telecom execs bonus payments and any salary over $100,000 until they roll it out.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
worse--
The telecom industries were paid handsomely in the 90s to roll out a next generation fiber optic backbone infrastructure.
They laid a very small amount of fiber, and pocketed the rest of the money, then shrugged when asked where the money went.
https://www.techdirt.com/artic...
I see this all over again. Especially with Pai at the helm of the FCC.
It is a waste without oversight of the companies involved.
Money spent previously did not result in usable broadband despite the companies claims.
Those companies should not receive and further funding.
Same goes for cellular, my phone always says 4g, however it is to slow to use with ridiculous latency.
False all around.
I expected more from commenters on /.
You must be new here to /.
It's been some time since there wasn't a ton of crap comments on any given thread.
I'd love a free phone! Unfortunately, I have to pay for my phone, my service, and my broadband, with the money I earn from my job, you know, like it's supposed to work.
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.
It's much more expensive to do that in underserved / rural areas, and that's exactly what the Universal Service Fund was designed to help with.
This is true, but there is a big elephant in the room. The main "justification" that the ISPs give for having regulations rolled back is that it will allow them to "spur innovation" and create a better experience for the customer. The claim that rolling back net neutrality, for example, was necessary for them to be willing to invest in infrastructure.
So, where is this infrastructure? You're telling us citizens and tax payers that, despite getting pretty much getting everything you wanted from your captured regulators... what, still no infrastructure? Still need to government to day? Doesn't seem very "innovative" to me.
It's all BS, of course. The only "innovative" products the ISPs understand are new, innovative billing models.
The fact is, that the USF already exists, and unless the laws change, it's not going away. So why not use it for its intended purpose?
But the FCC and the ISPs can't have it both ways (actually, they can, and it's frustrating).
They claim the need an unregulated environment so that "market forces" can somehow make everything cool, but it's not. Where are these market forces now? They were supposed to spur innovation and infrastructure investment.
I hate ISPs. They lie too much.
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...
Seems like the money is always spent incorrectly.
https://www.dailyyonder.com/op...
That map is missing a lot of stuff. For example, Chelan and Douglas counties both have PUD fiber, which supplies gigabit FTTH to virtually every address in these rural counties, for an extremely reasonable price. Once you have the fiber installed, the citizens have a choice of some 10 ISPs, 6 or 8 TV providers, and a dozen telephone companies. Total access fee for the fiber is something like $15/mo, and the ISPs are about $20.
...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
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
Yeah, that's the tell. 5G isn't going to do anything for rural broadband, the fact that Pai is spinning it that way proves this is just welfare for the telecom industry.
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
The telecom industries were paid handsomely in the 90s to roll out a next generation fiber optic backbone infrastructure. They laid a very small amount of fiber, and pocketed the rest of the money, then shrugged when asked where the money went.
No, they laid the fiber. They laid ass loads of fiber in rural area. I used to live in bumfuck Alabama, the only internet I could get was satellite or dialup. AT&T came through dug up the whole county, and laid shitloads of fiber. They even ran it down the side of an abandon logging road. There was a fiber trunk 100 feet from my house.
The agreement was they would lay the fiber but there where no provisions to actually use it. They laid the fiber, like they where supposed, they just never set up the fucking infrastructure to make it useful.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
Are we buying from Europe, or China, specifically, Huawei?
Do you seriously not follow any news at all?