| reply to NetAdmin1
Re: Karl, why are you coming out against competition? If everyone knows the exact extent of everyone else's coverage area, it doesn't create a level playing field. Large corporations with deep pockets are in a much better position to exploit that data in anticompetitive ways than smaller ones. My ISP doesn't target areas where the "big guys" do business for predatory pricing or similar tactics; we can't afford to, and besides, we play fair. But the incumbent telephone and cable companies have no scruples about doing this. In fact, we see them doing it all the time.
Think of the mapping effort as a sort of census. (There is, in fact, a site called "BroadbandCensus.com" which was mentioned in a comment below the Public Knowledge blog posting.) In a real census, it is well known that people will not report accurate information (or even answer the door when the census taker comes) if they believe that sensitive personal information will be published, or even warehoused and possibly be released at any time in the near future. Even when the e government does make assurances that data will be released only in aggregated form, many people belonging to certain groups — such as Hispanics (including those with legal residence and/or citizenship) and more recently Muslims — believe that the risk is too great that the data will get out or be abused, and do not report.
Now, think about what it might be like for a small businessperson, in a line of business where anticompetitive tactics are rampant and government protection of competitors is nil, to be asked to participate in a "census" where detailed data about his or her would be published, not anonymized, and not aggregated. This person’s livelihood and personal fortune are at stake here, in a way that you could not imagine unless you yourself had skin in the game.
We must respect the hard working people who are out there actually deploying broadband to unserved areas, many of whom are justifiably worried that a huge megacorporation will find a way to squash them or "cut off their air supply"
(as a Microsoft exec once famously put it). Every day, I work incredibly hard, against incredible odds, to keep my ISP business running and my customers satisfied. Should the government be gathering competitive intelligence for large corporations that want to put me out of business? I think not. If you want to see more competition and better coverage, don't harm competitors by enabling anticompetitive tactics. |
|
| said by SuperWISP:Should the government be gathering competitive intelligence for large corporations that want to put me out of business? Government should be giving everyone access to pertinent and accurate information. Having accurate information available to everyone is just as important as allowing Mom and Pop providers to have breathing space. It doesn't need to say that ISP X services area Y, but people need to know that street A in town B has service while street B in town B doesn't have service.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" |
|
| said by NetAdmin1:Government should be giving everyone access to pertinent and accurate information. Yes, but it should be selective about what information it gives out. I doubt that you would like it too much if, for instance, it published your tax return. 
said by NetAdmin1:Having accurate information available to everyone is just as important as allowing Mom and Pop providers to have breathing space. It doesn't need to say that ISP X services area Y, but people need to know that street A in town B has service while street B in town B doesn't have service. It might well say that. However, as a WISP, I can tell you that we don't go street by street. We go square mile by square mile. And if you're on the edge of our range or behind an obsruction, we can usually beef up your antenna or install a relay. So, if the neighborhood has service from a WISP, you don't have to worry about that sort of granularity. Zip codes are good enough. |
|
| Not necessarily. Some zip codes are large enough that one half of the zip code may be able to receive service and the other half can not. That's the problem with the current mapping system - one person able to get broadband in a zip code qualifies the whole zip code as broadband capable.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" |
|
| said by NetAdmin1: Some zip codes are large enough that one half of the zip code may be able to receive service and the other half can not. This has nothing to do with the size of the Zip Code. Someone who is behind a tall building or lots of trees might not be able to receive service (or not easily, anyway) due to the obstruction. It's pointless to try to determine this in advance. Instead, map the general area and let the user call providers, who will bend over backward to find a way to serve the customer. |
|
| said by SuperWISP:said by NetAdmin1: Some zip codes are large enough that one half of the zip code may be able to receive service and the other half can not. This has nothing to do with the size of the Zip Code. The size of a zip absolutely is relevant if you are going to map availability by zip code. Just because some people in a zip code can receive service doesn't mean everyone in a zip code can. There are zip codes that are larger than a hundred square miles.
Someone who is behind a tall building or lots of trees might not be able to receive service (or not easily, anyway) due to the obstruction. That only matters if you are talking ONLY about wireless providers. The topic at hand isn't just wireless providers.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" |
|
| said by NetAdmin1:That only matters if you are talking ONLY about wireless providers. If more than one provider serves that area, then (again) it's the aggregate coverage area that matters. Which is my point. Don't compromise providers' proprietary information, and put them at risk, by publishing that information. |
|
|
|
| said by SuperWISP:Don't compromise providers' proprietary information, and put them at risk, by publishing that information. Coverage isn't proprietary information. That's the problem I see with your reasoning. On the contrary, most providers put their coverage information in the public realm to be used by potential consumers.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" |
|
| Coverage is very proprietary information. Neither the large nor the small providers publish it, though for different reasons. The telcos, for example, don't do it because they need to qualify lines for DSL. And small providers (or savvy ones, at any rate) don't do it because they know that it will subject them to anticompetitive practices. |
|
1 edit | said by SuperWISP:Coverage is very proprietary information. Dozens of websites and broadband service search tools prove otherwise. The fact that I can search for broadband service at all without having to call in and jump through hoops illustrates that coverage information is not "very proprietary". You might act like your coverage information needs to be a state secret, but other providers publish coverage information so that potential customers can easily determine if service is available.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" |
|
| Sorry, but that's simply incorrect. They'll let you input a telephone number and try to qualify the pair for DSL. But won't reveal, geographically, where each number is located, so you cannot map out their coverage block by block or address by address.
Kindly don't mess with our business. It's precarious enough for us and for other competitive ISPs to compete with companies tens of thousands our size. We, and the public, don't need or want you to use the government's guns to help those large companies to destroy competition. |
|
| said by SuperWISP:Sorry, but that's simply incorrect. They'll let you input a telephone number and try to qualify the pair for DSL. But won't reveal, geographically, where each number is located, so you cannot map out their coverage block by block or address by address. That's for DSL only. Other services, including wireless providers actually have coverage maps available on their websites. Whether you believe that fact or not doesn't change it.
Seriously, look at:
»www.wirelessmapping.com/WISP%20N···0Map.png
»www.clearwire.com/store/service_areas.php
»aircanopy.net/services
Kindly don't mess with our business. Mapping availability isn't messing with anyone's business. 
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" |
|
| That's a perfect example of the right way to do wireless mapping. The data is aggregated. You can't deduce the location of any one provider's site, or determine its exact coverage area, from the map.
said by NetAdmin1:Mapping availability isn't messing with anyone's business. Yes, it is. It's setting large competitors up to harm us. Again, you obviously know nothing about this business and have no knowledge of what WISPs face. Kindly show some respect for the hard working people who are risking everything to get people access to competitive broadband. |
|
| said by SuperWISP:Yes, it is. It's setting large competitors up to harm us. If large providers wanted to be in areas that you covered, they would have already been there, long before you were. Small WISPs thrive because large providers don't want to serve those areas because the CAPEX of building out to those areas is too high. That is a fact.
Mapping who and where WISPs serve don't change the fact that the CAPEX is too high and isn't worth it to larger providers. No company is going to spend millions or billions to wire an area if they will never see a reasonable return on the investment.
Again, you obviously know nothing about this business and have no knowledge of what WISPs face. I do work in the business, at one of the large telecom companies you blithely rail against.
If you think that mapping availability is suddenly going to make large providers come into your area, you obviously don't know anything about how wireline providers work.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" |
|
| said by NetAdmin1:I do work in the business, at one of the large telecom companies you blithely rail against. Ah, there's your motivation. You want the government to force us to reveal proprietary information so that you can try to run us out of business. Nuff sed. Game over. |
|
| said by SuperWISP:said by NetAdmin1:I do work in the business, at one of the large telecom companies you blithely rail against. Ah, there's your motivation. You want the government to force us to reveal proprietary information so that you can try to run us out of business. Nuff sed. Game over. So, not only do you know nothing about the business of being a large ISP, you also have ESP? I'm amazed. You don't have a clue about my motivations.
If you smart enough to look beyond blind hatred of the big boys, you would see that mapping out availability could actually help you out.
But you don't want to hear it because you think everyone is ganged up in some big business conspiracy to put you out of business. Like I said, if Qwest wanted to put you out of business, they already would be in your area. The fact that you don't have any major competition is a clue that Qwest isn't interested in your area.
And contrary to what you believe, your potential competitors already know more about your coverage than you think.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" |
|
