Google still plays it’s don’t be evil jingle at every opportunity. The company has facilitated setting much information free, often a the angst of those who have profited from controlling, not out of benevolence, but to profit. Doing something worthwhile and profiting from it is the highest accomplish for any business and Google deserves kudos for that. The company also has no respect for privacy, except for its own. The company’s own data sets, built from our search and surfing behavior are anything but public. While trade secrets are a company’s right, the will to use them in ways that could be harmful to the public are not.

As Google begins to index public data, and begins to collect data on how we use it, the potential to use that information looms larger. Will that information be used for less than benevolent purposes? Only time will tell.  Power corrupts, and it’s hard to believe that Google can avoid the inevitable.

Last year, we released a public data search feature that enables people to quickly find useful statistics in search. More recently, we expanded this service to include information from the World Bank, such as population data for every region in the world. More and more public agencies, non-profits and other organizations are looking for ways to open up their data and expand global access to this kind of information. We want to help keep that momentum going, so today we’re sharing a snapshot of some of the most popular public data search topics on Google. We’re also launching the Google Public Data Explorer, an experimental visualization tool in Google Labs. (Googleblog)

An army of approximately 2 million temp census takers are fanning out across the nation to collect data, including internet access information.  With a growing clueless class that thinks their vote is simply a way to get the rest of us to pay for things, I worry about how that data will be collected and used. The problem with the insisting that someone else will always pay assumes that the rest of the population is even more blissfully empty headed than the clueless.

The current federal administration’s stated goal is to connect 100% of Americans. Considering the fact that around 20% of the population does not want service enough to pay for it, it’s an easy guess where we are going. Is it really such a good idea to task the feds with providing access? We are already lagging behind the rest of the developed world and one more drag on broadband capital will not improve things. Is getting the government to force your neighbor to pay for your access really any different than stealing their Wifi?

The esteemed Congressman (Ed Markey) to the left just applauded a draft FCC broadband plan the sets a 200KBPS standard for broadband. Congratulating the FCC for doing nothing to improve broadband and spinning its incompetence as if it had does not deserve a commendation. Then again, Mr. Markey has been carrying the telco agenda forward for most of his career. I hope the people of Massachusetts have enough common sense to send this career politician packing in November.

We started this blog three years ago to help set a standard of what broadband should be in an open market. Since then, we’ve seen less competition and a less open market evolve. While 4G wireless is ramping up, those who control it are not new entrants to the marketplace. With ownership of the wireless spectrum transferred to the fixed line duopoly for a bought and paid for FCC with the blessing of a bought and paid for Congress, wireless will never compete with fixed line. So with all of the spending and talk of better, more open broadband, we have pretty much the same connection speeds and availability hat we had three years ago at pretty much the same prices. The only change the hope and change folks have provided are some very expensive studies and maps. The other political crowd who tout “letting the market work” have done nothing to actually open the market and let it work.

As Google has announced trials of GB class connections I still  think it’s not likely it will enter the market as an ISP.  Google needs to develop stuff that will leverage the class of broadband that will be appearing in the rest of the world of the next few year’s if it intends to keep its leadership position. Since Gigibit broadband doesn’t exist here, the company is building its own lab. This is also a demonstration of what is possible if a company is interested in doing it. Not a dime of tax dollars involved, and this is what needs to be done to put the US back in the lead. Blanket this country with GB broadband and the economy will boom. Dear Mr. Markey: In view of this, please explain how the FCC is serving us with a 200KBPS plan that protects the telcos and keeps the market closed?

Why do we need GB broadband? Simple. It makes your net connection as fast as a local one.  For one thing, that would make online storage work in a whole new way.  You really could keep your stuff in the cloud and use it from the cloud. A whole new industry of data centers would offer storage as a service, cheap. With good data management practices, that could also end lost data as a result of local drive crashes.  Not cheap enough  you say? Consider this: New entrant Cloud Leverage has modeled a profitable business around 5 cents per Gigabyte with no bandwidth charges. Near instant access via GB broadband would make this an explosive industry with much lower prices.

What else would Gigibit broadband enable? The thread is open. Please share your ideas.

All of the chatter about  4G wireless in the big tech media is really beginning to annoy me.  The wireless broadband world as of right now is 100% Wimax, and it works. In fact this post comes to you tonight via a Wimax connection that outperforms AT&T’s best DSL offering in my neighborhood, and lags behind Time Warner’s pricey 15MBPS service a bit. So, 4G wireless is here, working and destined to improve.  Today it is 100% Wimax. You’d never know that from reading posts in the big tech media. They keep telling us that something called LTE is what I’ve been waiting for. Well, excuse me, I’m not waiting, I’m using. So why is it we keep reading FUD like this in GigaOM? I think it’s pretty simple. Lots of bloggers are following the lame stream media and recycling press releases and talking points as news. Sorry to single you out Om, I really do like your blog and you’re far from  the worst offender.

Let me spell my bias out for you, and I think it’s pretty much the same as the average broadband consumer. IF an LTE based carrier  shows up with a better deal I’m a customer. But, that’s based on if and when. Today, I’m writing about what I can buy now.

I do wish we’d get past discussion of technology. It’s a no brainer that LTE has a commitment from the major cell phone operators. It’s also a fact no one really has a clear idea of what LTE will be beyond the results of preliminary lab stats. The idea behind LTE is to make an easy transition form current cell phone technology for the nickel and dime you to death cellular carriers. Wimax was never designed to do that. So far, Wimax has been deployed as a big open pipe. Try getting that from the cell phone guys. By the time LTE is expected to be available in major markets, next gen Wimax will be available and an upgrade. I see a coming 4G war not only between two technologies, but also between two business models.

Bottom line: I can promise you we’re getting no largess from either the LTE or Wimax camp. We’re based in Texas, so I’ll use a little local analogy. Today Wimax is the only horse in town, and it’s pricier than we would like and slower than we would like. At the same time, as of today, the LTE camp is all hat and no cattle. Contrary to all of the tech media propaganda, both are likely to be with us for some time to come. In fact, I doubt one will be an clear winner over the other. There’s plenty of evidence for how that could work in today’s two competing cell phone standards.

It’s extremely irresponsible to call one a clear winner over the other before both players even take the field, and we’re not going to do that.

There was a rampant fraud during the Internet boom of the 90’s that resulted in the investment  bubble of the same period. In every major case, existing laws were broken and lax oversight allowed the bubble to grow. The blame should be shared by those in government who were supposed to be enforcing those laws. Instead of admitting to their lack of oversight, a new law was passed that would prevent further fraud. Unfortunately, it also killed the good IPO’s along wit the bad ones.

Ever since the passage of a piece of bad legislation called Sarbanes-Oxley, there has been a draught of American startups. The few that have been turning up are being built from the ground up with he intent to sell out to larger concerns. Not only has this killed innovation, the lack of IPO’s to invest in  sent the mountains of dollars that the fed keeps printing into commodities (like energy and food), therefore driving up prices. It also made the derivative a more desirable risk investment since there were no start ups to invest in. So, SOX not only put the brakes on the American tech industry, it also set the stage for the financial collapse we’re currently stuck in.

“I.P.O. has become a bad word in the Valley,” said Richard Barton, a founder and the chief executive of Zillow.com, a real estate site, and a venture partner at Benchmark Capital.

When start-ups grow up, the founders pay back their investors by selling the business to a bigger company or selling shares to the public. Public offerings have long been the more desirable option. They earn the founders and investors more money and the promise of continuing returns, and enable them to keep expanding the company.

Still, in a survey of start-ups by the venture capital firm DCM, only 19 percent said they expected to go public. Three-quarters said a major barrier was stricter regulations for public companies.

“People don’t want to run public companies anymore because they don’t want to get dragged through the mud,” said Rob Coneybeer, a managing director at the investment firm Shasta Ventures. “They’re so focused on paperwork that they can’t focus on building a business.”

In the last two years, only 18 tech start-ups have gone public, compared with 143 in the two years prior. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which tightened corporate governance and accounting rules, has taken a lot of the blame. (New York Times)

Sadly, there’s little being done in Washington to restore American innovation. The current regulation and tax happy crowd running the Congress and the White House can’t be doing much to encourage the best and brightest of us to take risks. Sure, there’s been a ton on “investing of stimulus money” by the feds, but outside  of the military and NASA in the 60’s and 70’s, governments track record at fostering the creation of anything useful is horrible. So what’s happened to those best and brightest innovators who are not working for the feds or on a salary at the corporation? They’re sidelined. In fact many simply have gone John Galt or literally have retired from creating value and jobs. It’s time to change course.

I’ve only been critical of the Obama administration when someone like its FCC chair keeps laying net neutrality eggs or we hire a  CIO  that would not have passed simplest resume padding check in the corporate world.  This time the buffoonery has gone too far.  I’m calling for the President to take some of his crew out to the woodshed for a reality check. In this case it’s his budget director bellyaching that the computers are slow. Blaming outdated computers for mismanagement simply won’t pass muster here.

A big reason why the government is inefficient and ineffective is because Washington has outdated technology, with federal workers having better computers at home than in the office.

This startling admission came Thursday from Peter Orszag, who manages the federal bureaucracy for President Barack Obama.

The public is getting a bad return on its tax dollars because government workers are operating with outdated technologies, Orszag said in a statement that kicked off a summit between Obama and dozens of corporate CEOs.

“Twenty years ago, people who came to work in the federal government had better technology at work than at home,” said Orszag, director of the Office of Management and Budget. “Now that’s no longer the case.

“The American people deserve better service from their government, and better return for their tax dollars.”

The White House release that included Orszag’s comments said one “specific source” of ineffective and inefficient government is the huge technology gap between the public and private sectors that results in billions of dollars in waste, slow and inadequate customer service and a lack of transparency about how dollars are spent. (The Hill)

Someone from the Obama administration needs to go out into corporate America, visit some small businesses, schools, and even a few of our homes. Most of us are using OLD COMPUTERS, and we are still THE MOST PRODUCTIVE PEOPLE ON THE PLANET. With the average Fed making north of $68K these days, they should have some nice new computers at home. I’m sure the systems in the office are slower, but even slow computers doing typical productivity apps work faster then the person using them. While the rest of us produce with old stuff trying to work our way out of this economic abyss, we’re told the feds need a new Macbook. Earth to feds. None of us can afford to buy new computers. Since your direct boss is absent from commenting, I’ll give you a directive from those of us who pay the bills: Quit wasting our money and learn how to do your jobs.

… but the jury is still out. A new group with a new website and mission is about to hit the wireless arena. The name of the group - Focus Driven. Their website is Focusdriven.org. Their mission, to raise awareness of the distracted driver –

Each year, thousands of families suffer the loss of loved ones needlessly at the hands of drivers distracted by their cell phones. Whether texting, using hands-free or handheld phones, these drivers not only put their lives on the line, but they risk killing others on the road.

FocusDriven provides victims of cell phone distracted drivers, and their friends and families, with an outlet for sharing their stories. We also provide those interested in this issue with opportunities to get involved.

FocusDriven can help you petition your state legislation; educate your friends, families and coworkers about the hazards of distracted driving; or share your story with state representatives to help support legislation for safer roadways.

FocusDriven supporters and advocates know, and many have experienced, the very real consequences of drivers distracted by their cell phones. We ask you to make the pledge to not drive distracted, share what you learn on our site with those you know and get involved to help make our nation’s roads safer.

Are the aims admirable? Yes. But it can be like anything else — unless moderation and common sense is applied then the spiral downward is a swift and sure one. Two examples to my point. MADD — mothers against drunk driving. Early on they had a very positive affect on drunk driving. But slowly the mission itself changed from one looking for results (which was the basis for their early success.), to one of success at all costs. Even when the results can be marginal at best and the overall community results unfavorable.

The second I can provide is bradycampaign.org. They too started out with a laudable goal to reduce gun violence. (The violence is the issue, not the gun, its just the instrument. But that’s a different story.) They have slowly morphed not into a gun violence advocate but a gun banning advocate. The lever of that transformation being the funding by various anti gun sub-groups. What I would envision is that Focusdriven.org would become over funded by a Telco PAC and then slowly twisted to a meek shell of its former mission. Don’t let that happen to you.

I wish them God speed. This is an issue that needs a societal response. There are times in life that do not require you to answer the phone. Driving happens to be one of them.

Linky.

If I were writing the FCC’s extension request it would go something like this:

Dear Congress, we need another 30 days to put a better clown suit on the duopoly’s wish list so we can spin it to the public  as a broadband plan. We’re also going to need a little extra time to get all of your individual earmarks carefully spun as a benefit for all Americans, even if they have nothing to do with broadband. If you would like to see the offiicial document instead of my speculative interpretation, go here.

What will the final plan include? The buzz coming out of the industry, FCC hints and from Congress all points to a continued duopoly lock on last mile access and a new reallocation of spectrum. I predict we’ll be sold on the idea of putting new spectrum on the auction block that will be largely consumed by the current duopoly and wireless cartel. Will be get a better pipes? Maybe a little better mobile one. Reality is if the wireless cartel can lay its hand on more spectrum it can deliver more bandwidth from fewer towers. If the spectrum is auctioned, only players with deep pockets will have a chance of winning. That means no new competition, and no real innovation. It also means a new invisible tax as the cost of auctioned spectrum will be passed to the consumer through higher charges.

If this predictable path is followed,  we’ll have very much the same broadband as we have now, controlled by very much the same people who have been satisfied with putting the United States in a race to last place when it comes to average end user bandwidth at the highest prices in the developed world.

Sick of it? You can write your representative and the President and tell them you will vote them out if something does not change. I’m doing that every few days and you should too. Remind them we need less “help” from Washington and a lot more competition.

We wish you and yours the best of Christmases. We want to thank you for being with us in this very difficult year and hope to see you in 2010!

Look out, here comes VP Joe Biden with some broadband hope and change! All of the left leaning lemmings in the news media are trying to build buzz for the soon to be announced dispersal of another chunk of  $7+ billion in broadband stimulus. So far that money has provided neither broadband or stimulus. What we have seen are orders for quite a few very pricey studies and maps. Will this little piggie morph into a gifthorse for broadband starved rural America? My bet is only if a rural deployment coincides with the ability to do yet another political payoff.

Vice President Joe Biden on Thursday is scheduled to announce $2 billion in grants that will be used to build broadband networks in underserved communities.

The funding, which is part of the $7.2 billion that was set aside for broadband in President Obama’s $787 billion economic recovery deal earlier this year, will start with an initial $182 million investment in 18 broadband projects in 17 states. Biden is announcing the stimulus grants in Dawsonville, Ga. (Cnet)

Hey Joe! What we really need is a stick in the form of some good healthy competition and NO taxpayer funded carrots. How about legislating some equal access to the airwaves and sharing of last mile infrastructure. So that and you’ll be able to watch broadband bloom without the heavy hand of you, your boss, the FCC or the Congress. In fact, if you can open the market, why don;t you go on vacation? We were doing much better when you were not “working hard”  to help us.