In a world loaded with technology we act like campers swatting flies with 19th century band allocations. –

The problem is that we’re all locked into the spectrum offered by a single cell phone carrier, and our phones can’t even access most of the wifi hotspots that are in range, much less use them to make calls.

As Yap et al. outline in a provocative new paper entitled Delivering Capacity for the Mobile Internet by Stitching Together Networks, this leads to all sorts of inefficiencies that could be solved by a network ruled by standards that allowed devices to be agnostic about which portion of the wireless spectrum they are currently using:

- Increased capacity through more efficient statistical sharing. Cellular network operators tend to heavily over-provision their network in order to handle times of peak load and congestion. Most of the time, the net- work is lightly loaded. If instead they were able to hand off traffic to each other, or from cellular to WiFi networks, then their traffic load would be smoother, and their network more efficient. For example, what if AT&T could re-route traffic from their iPhone users to T-Mobile during an overload? Or T-Mobile could re- route their customers’ flows to a nearby WiFi hotspot?

- Exploit differences in technologies and frequency bands. Mobile technologies such as EVDO and HSPA provide wide area coverage with consistent bandwidth guaran- tees; while technologies like WiFi provide high band- width and low latency. Lower frequencies provides better coverage and penetration; while higher frequen- cies provides better spatial reuse. Being able to use the most appropriate technology for the application at hand would make best use of capacity available.

- Open up new sources of capacity. The ability to move between networks also open up new sources of capacity. For example, one can now use a network such as that of fon.com to supplement their main network, without having to deploy an extensive WiFi network. Such crowd-sourcing can be a powerful tool to cover dead spots and relieve congestion.

ThirdPipe has observed this since it started posting. We have advocated a technical solution set that included opening up the bands, requiring intelligent spread spectrum devices. We could open up that other 95% of the bandwidth not currently being utilized. Prices would drop, additional services can be had and disasters like the AT&T 4G debacle in places like New York City.

Its time.

Linky.

Harold Feld lays another missive out there — Kerry, Other Ds, Defend FCC Going Ahead on Broadband Authority NOI. The primary argument is that the FCC’s detractors, as the Burger King commerical says — “Want it their way”. Now I won’t deny they do, who doesn’t? But Harold, I think you are intentionally dodging a few key points –

We saw this recently with the EPA and carbon emissions. The Congressional climate change bill stalled. So EPA acted under its existing statutes to make sure Americans have clean air and stuff. “Shocking!” Cried Industry. “An appalling power grab!” Agreed industry allies in Congress. “Just doing our actual firkin’ job you told us to do,” responded EPA. “And if you get your act together to provide more detailed guidance on climate change, we’ll be all set to do what you want. Until then, we do the job you told us to do with the tools we have.”

Which brings us back to the current fight over broadband. After the Comcast/BitTorrent case, spending some time pondering what to do, Genachowski concluded that if the FCC wanted to accomplish anything in the National Broadband Plan or have the ability to protect consumers if anything went wrong, he needed to look at the underlying basis for FCC authority and consider a new approach. That includes proposing “Title II-lite,” “Third Way,” whatever you want to call moving broadband out of the “Title I” ancillary services box and into the “Title II” telecommunications services box. Needless to say, the forces in favor of the status quo reacted predictably by fighting any action tooth and nail.

How do I think Mr. Feld misses the mark? –

• The FCC was designated as the protector and arbiter of the wireless realm to prevent conflict and promote its expansion AS A TECHNOLOGY AND SERVICE. That is what the 1934 act is all about and little has changed from that original mission.
• The expanded intent to protect consumers via ‘net neutrality’? If that is the case then the FCC is the wrong agency to even consider, it should be moved to CPSC. That is their charter. Or the FTC if one thinks that market collusion is harming the consumer. But not the FCC.
• Then here is the big one you don’t feign to mention. In your EPA example, the Court (SCOTUS) ruled that indeed the EPA had the responsibility to consider CO2 as a possibly harmful gas as part of its charter in the founding legislation. In the case of the 1st DC Court, Comcast vs FCC, the Court ruled specifically against the FCC as having no controlling authority.

  You can’t in the second instance down play the rationale of the Court for your own ends then upsell in the first instance when it suits your need. The Courts have been reasonably consistent on this matter of administrative law. Good for them and an awful red herring in your missive.

There are of course the nagging bits that the beltway does not want to face. Like, in several survey’s a full third of respondents in target exurban markets said they would not connect EVEN IF THE PIPE PASSED THEIR HOUSE. What a waste of money. Which is why the physical plant rarely strays outside the major MSA on the country. The other little bit, is even if the FCC were to move forward, how does it get funded? Tax? In an election year? With the Democrats on the defensive? And no authoritative legislative means to fulfill it? Again a waste of time.

If the Beltway wants to see a broadband implementation, then they need to change their mindset. A) The pipe for the exurban space is in the air not the ground. B) That means that Congress should grant tax incentives for WISPs to expand their foot print commiserate with the data rate capabilities. C) That the FCC provide fast track tower approvals and the development of a national construction plan consistent with the National Building Code to be able to fast track tower construction.

But Mr. Feld, the NOI is a dead letter politically.

For Starbucks to open up their WiFi network for free to their customers? Their biggest competitor, Micky D’s, did this about 6 months ago. D’s is not totally open, but if all you want to do is surf, well then it is. But still, ‘Bucks usually moves faster than this —

Starting July 1st, Starbucks will finally begin to offer free and unrestricted Internet access over Wi-Fi in its stores. Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz made this announced at Wired’s Disruptive by Design conference today. With this, Starbucks finally joins the ranks of neighborhood coffee stores all over the world that have long offered free and easy access to Wi-Fi. By Fall 2010, Starbucks also plans to give Internet users in its stores free access to paid sites, including the Wall Street Journal.

Until now, Starbucks customers were restricted to two hours of Wi-Fi access and needed to register for a Starbucks Card in order to access the Internet. Starbucks already offered free Wi-Fi access to AT&T customers.
Free Access to Paid Content

The free access to paid content sites, however, is the big news here. According to Starbucks, this new service, called the “Starbucks Digital Network,” will give users who surf the Internet from U.S. company owned stores access to “various paid sites and services such as wsj.com, exclusive content and previews, free downloads, local community news and activities, on their laptops, tablets or smart phones.” Besides the Wall Street Journal, Starbucks’ partners include Apple’s iTunes, The New York Times, Patch, USA TODAY, Yahoo and ZAGAT.

The free paid access sweeter I guess makes up for the delay?

Linky.

Public Knowledge is at it again. Writing white papers and having discussions on them. All well and good I guess, it keeps somebody employed in a bad economy. But in reality, this is like poking a whale with a bang stick. It does no good for the poker and makes the whale mad. Essentially the white paper in question, Breaking the Logjam:Some Modest Proposals for Enhancing Transparency, Efficiency and Innovation in Public Spectrum Management, suggests rearranging the deck chairs. (Besides the point that verbose titles were verboten when I went to high school.) But not all is lost, there was one glimmer out of the morass —

The Federal CTO, working with the NTIA and other federal agencies, should develop policies enabling and encouraging federal agencies to move from the current system of assigned spectrum allocations to a system leveraging new technologies to permit dynamic assignment to agencies on an “as needed” basis.
In essence, the federal government would transition from a system in which agencies hold the equivalent of a spectrum license to one where the federal government manages a vast pool of wireless capacity from which agencies may “draw” as needed.

The idea that the spectrum is a pool resource not carved up between the FBI, DEA, NSA, etc in small pockets. Much of which because of the utilization never gets used period. So that is a move in the right direction. But other suggestions —

• The NTIA and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) should expand the cooperation required between the agencies by statute. In particular, the agencies should publish an annual joint spectrum plan based on the mandatory consultation between the Chairman of the FCC and the Administrator of the NTIA,2 and should clarify the “expedited” process mandated by statute for processing applications for mixed federal and non-federal use.
• The NTIA should take steps to improve opportunities for public involvement in its spectrum management decisions, and should launch its own e-government initiative, similar to the Reboot.FCC.Gov.
• The NTIA, the Secretary of Commerce, and the Director of the OMB should “zero base” federal spectrum use, requiring all federal agencies to reapply for spectrum allocations. Failure to reapply, and provide adequate detail on use, will result in elimination of existing spectrum allocation.
• The President should require all agencies to prepare a “spectrum budget” in the same manner they prepare a federal budget, assessing existing and future needs. The NTIA would serve as coordinator for these agencies and would provide technical support, assisted by the federal Chief Technology Officer (CTO) and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
• Based on these exercises, the CTO, with support from the NTIA, would assist agencies in upgrading wireless equipment and enhancing the use of spectrum resources for individual agencies, in order to enhance their overall missions.
• The NTIA and the OMB should conduct a comprehensive review of existing federal statutes to determine how private entities can make contributions to federal agencies to enhance federal spectrum efficiency and promote innovative use of wireless resources by the federal government. The review should also seek to establish ways to further enhance public transparency and account ability with regard to spectrum use.
• The NTIA and the FCC should work with state and local governments, and their trade associations, to find ways in which federal, state and local governments can enhance emergency communications and spectrum efficiency, and promote innovative uses of wireless technology at all levels of government.

The rest is merely paper shuffling, for paper shuffling sake for which someone will be issued a grant handsomely, pretty printed, shelved and forgotten in the matter of 18 months. Great work if you can get it. But it solves nothing and in the end just triggers a turf war among agencies in the whole matter.

What is lacking in this paper is the realization that technology renders most of the proposal moot. The glimmer out of the piece was the realization that spectrum is a pool to be utilized, not hoarded. But it does not go far enough. The technology exists today that CPE (Customer Premise Equipment) is capable of self allocation. With that capability in hand, all the other discussions are rendered useless. Poof.

Spectrum utilization by most entities are broken down into two components, infrastructure and ad hoc. Infrastructure being those facilities that have a long lived use of a band. Example being point to point wireless nodes interconnecting buildings. An example of the latter being tactical radios to be used by, say an FBI team for a mission. Regardless with spread spectrum equipment and a valid reservation system, on demand spectrum allocation is possible.Nay it is already being done by the DoD, so it is a reality.

So here is the ThridPipe Federal Proposal –

• Congress shall mandate that in 7 years that all federal wireless usage shall be self allocating spread spectrum CPE. Funding to be allocated to realize this end.
• The FCC is directed to a) Realign the ownership of spectrum to a single entity. b) Licensing is soft revoked, continued use but ownership transfers. c) That a drop dead date is issued for final revocation of license.
• The FCC is directed to issue an RFP for a) The development of infrastructure and ad hoc wireless CPE. b) The development of a spectrum reservation system for (a). c) Implementation of (a) across the federal footprint.

We are at the point, this is not a matter of technology, or a matter of discussion. It is a matter of the will to do it. Lets DO IT, not TALK it to death.

Did you know that data comm billing can ruin your love life?

A Toronto woman says the billing practices of Rogers Wireless Inc. led to her husband discovering her extramarital affair.

Now the woman, whose husband walked out, is suing the communications giant for $600,000 for alleged invasion of privacy and breach of contract, the results of which she says have ruined her life.

In 2007, Gabriella Nagy had a cellphone account with Rogers which sent the monthly bill to her home address in her maiden name. Her husband was the account holder for the family’s cable TV service at the same address. Around June 4, 2007, he called Rogers to add internet and home phone.

The following month, Rogers mailed a “global” invoice for all of its services to the matrimonial home that included an itemized bill for Nagy’s cellular service, according to the statement of claim filed in Ontario Superior Court of Justice.

When Nagy’s husband opened the Rogers invoice, he saw several hour-long phone calls to a single phone number.

“Nobody does business this way and he’s not stupid,” says Nagy, who is in her 30s. He called the number, spoke to the “third party” who confirmed the affair, which had lasted only a few weeks, Nagy told the Star.

“My husband didn’t tell me that’s how he found out, he just left.”

Moral of the story — Don’t cheat AND if you are going to, then at least have the smarts to order a separate phone AND carrier!

Heh.

Linky.

Much of the wireless industry has been resisting pretty strongly the idea of giving up the voice channel as a revenue stream. Fact what they are resisting is the concept that voice is just another piece of data. For example, almost a year ago Apple disapproved a Google app that permitted VoIP on the iPhone at the insistence of their AT&T transport partner.

Ok, but then what can you do about this? –

More time laughing with friends.
Less time in front of a computer.
Take free, unlimited Skype-to-Skype calls and IM on the go with your BlackBerry® or Android™ 3G smartphone from Verizon Wireless.

Yeah, its a shill quote right off the Skype site. But that is not what matters here. What is, is the fact that Skype/Verizon are putting a shot across the bow of every other vendor out there as it relates to voice minute charges.

Now of course there is a down side. That Skype call is now a data rated call. Which if you look at Verizon’s data rate plans is not a bargain in comparison. So for the consumer it is not a block buster cost saver. But this opens the door that voice is just another chunk of data. I would be inclined to look at T-Moble’s unlimited data plan for this Skype service. Get one of their Android phones and see what happens….

But the door is opening. Might take a year or two for folks to catch on but eventually there will be a data rate war in the wireless arena as voice channel services are dropped by consumers.

While the FCC releases it’s naked power grab carefully in a “Broadband Plan” wrapper that has AT&T and Verizon’s fingerprints all over it, wireless underdog Sprint is filling in a few of the gaps.

On demand, short term and prepaid brought wireless voice service to the under served masses, and on demand broadband can do the same. No fed subgeniuses and K street telco mouthpieces required, thank you.

Sold through Telespree, Mobile Broadband on Demand (TM) provides Sprint Wholesale partners a way to offer their customers an easy to use and economical way to experience mobile broadband. Offered as a standalone product or packaged with back office services, this unique plug and play product with over-the-air activation is so simple that a wide variety of enterprises will be able to add wireless broadband to their portfolio - from traditional MVNO wireless partners to companies that cater to more casual mobile data users such as rental car companies, airport kiosks, hotels, and retail stores.

Now, Sprint Wholesale partners are able to provide on-demand access of prepaid mobile broadband services to their customers by the day, week or month - or should the customer prefer, by megabyte. Consumers can enjoy an “off the shelf” experience; in which they simply purchase the partner-branded data card (no contract required), select the data plan of their choice, and connect. Users can easily track usage from a small data meter icon and can “top off” their balance as needed.  (Fierce Wireless)

While I hesitate to call the same product, offered at wholesale from a single source a way of fostering a competitive market, it’s a step in the right direction. By putting the service in the reseller channel, the service is likely to be offered in diffetent increments that will fit the needs of a wide variety of consumers. Making broadband available instantly, on a pay as you go product nit only makes sense, it’s bound to reach more of the under served than than any FCC authored subsidy scheme ever will.

In this case its Verizon again. The name of the game is a Titanic shuffle of their data rate plan. May sound like small potatoes till you see the hurdle before you as a customer –

First, the details: Verizon has introduced a new data tier at $9.99 per month with a 25MB cap—this is the cheapest data plan now offered by the company and by most US wireless carriers, and applies to all 3G devices. Why does this equate to “upping” the data charges? Because the company is ditching its $19.99 per month plan with a 75MB cap altogether—you must either go with the $9.99 plan for a third of the data or or the $29.99 smartphone plan that applies to WinMo, Android, or BlackBerry devices.

This in a sense is a variant of the give the lantern away but charge for the oil dearly. Only this is charge minimally for low oil but if you want to use the lamp every night you has to pay!

Why can’t stuff be simple? Just charge .001¢ per kilobyte and be done with it. Equitable, quick and customers can check their bills quickly. But then that would not justify the marketees salary would it?

Linky.

… 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.

Folks, listen up. If you have a wireless modem provided by Time Warner Cable you might want to have a look at it. No it won’t catch fire. But some 65,000 of them have a security hole –

Time Warner acknowledged the problem to Threat Level on Tuesday, and says it’s in the process of testing replacement firmware code from the router manufacturer, which it plans to push out to customers soon.

“We were aware of the problem last week and have been working on it since,” said Time Warner spokesman Alex Dudley.

The vulnerability lies with Time Warner’s SMC8014 series cable modem/Wi-Fi router combo, made by SMC. The device is one of several options Time Warner offers to customers who don’t want to install their own modem and router to use with the company’s broadband service. The device is installed with default configurations, which customers can alter only slightly through its built-in web server. The most customers can do through this page is add a list of URLs they want their router to block.

But blogger David Chen, writing at chenosaurus.com, recently discovered he could easily gain remote access to an administrative page served by the router that would allow him greater control of the device.

Chen, founder of a software startup called Pip.io, said he was trying to help a friend change the settings on his cable modem and discovered that Time Warner had hidden administrative functions from its customers with Javascript code. By simply disabling Javascript in his browser, he was able to see those functions, which included a tool to dump the router’s configuration file.

If you have a SMC8014 in your home network PROVIDED by TWC you might want to inquire with TWC as to whether your particular device has had a patch applied. Oh, and don’t take their word for it. Ask for the work order record. If they don’t have one for your account they probably did not do it. Keep in mind that somebody could drive up to your curb and be manipulating your device. Do not take this issue lightly.

Linky.