Tell me more x
, there is a new speed test available. Give it a try, leave feedback!
dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer

Search Topic:
uniqs
694
share rss forum feed
Sammer

join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA

For $350 Million data should belong to public!

If the Federal Government is going to spend $350 Million of our money on broadband mapping then all data collected should belong to the public and not to any (for or non-profit) corporation. Remember our government is not spending some organization's or corporation's money.

radiowebst
Brian Webster

join:2009-02-02
Cooperstown, NY

Re: For $350 Million data should belong to public!

And lets keep in mind a pdf map is not access to the data. The raw data and GIS files should be publicly available. All other mapping data paid for with US taxpayer money is available at no charge. Any information collected as a result of the funding should be the same. There are many ways to map this coverage without having to resort to a method where they must execute an NDA.

You can pick on Karl if you like, but in the end the real data needs to be public if funded by taxpayers. That way others may examine the information and or conduct their own studies. This argument of free access to the data has been in the GIS mapping industry for years. In the end the information is released with no strings attached. Fortunately with 350 million available, that is enough money to take on some of the labor intensive tasks that would be required to create a publicly available dataset that is accurate.

An easy fix for this problem would be to make sure that whomever receives this money will be required to release the raw data and GIS files, not just make some lame web interface that you can examine a single point or address at a time. If those conditions were in the terms of the funding, Connected Nation might not do the work.
SuperWISP

join:2007-04-17
Laramie, WY

An accurate census must always rely on confidentiality.

Just like a real census, a broadband census requires confidentiality to ensure the collection of accurate data. In a real census, people will not report accurate information (or any information at all!) if they believe that personal information will be published... or even warehoused and possibly be released at any time in the near future. Even when the 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 competition is nil, to be asked to participate in a "census" where detailed data about his or her business 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. What would you do if you were him or her? Probably fudge the data or opt out, just as human beings do in a real census when they have similar worries. This does not make for an accurate result.

Censuses of all kinds only work at all when they promise a degree of anonymity. I admire efforts to assess where broadband is available and where it is not. However, we must respect the hard working people who are out there actually providing broadband, who are worried every day that some huge megacorporation will find a way to squash them or "cut off their air supply" (as a Microsoft exec once famously put it).

I'm a WISP. Every day, I work incredibly hard, against incredible odds, to keep this business running and to fulfill my personal mission to make broadband available to as many unserved areas as I possibly can. And every day, I worry that the big guys will find some new way to put me out of business. Why provide them with the competitive intelligence they need to be more effective at doing that?
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Re: An accurate census must always rely on confidentiality.

What are you talking about? Comparing this to a census of private lives? It is far from the same.

This is not a trade secrect, a secret "recipe", or some covert design pending patent approval. You trying to say it is for "competitive reasons" is just down right stupid. In my view and in many others, you are hiding your short comings and it is actually anticompetitive and that is the problem with not having an accurate map.

I applaud you trying to be a WISP and serve people. However, who and where should not be kept a secret. If the incumbent you fear so much really wanted you out of business, then they would put you out of business. They can easily survey the areas you operate and see where you have the potential to serve and focus on those areas. They probably already know who you serve anyway.
SuperWISP

join:2007-04-17
Laramie, WY

Private data

said by Skippy25:

What are you talking about? Comparing this to a census of private lives? It is far from the same.
I am a sole proprietor. My business literally is part and parcel of my private life.
said by Skippy25:

This is not a trade secrect[sic],
Yes, it is. The FCC very eloquently explained why when a third party sued it under the FOIA to obtain this information after the FCC had assured ISPs that it would be kept private. (The judge agreed, and the FCC won the case.) See »projects.publicintegrity ··· Decl.pdf and also »projects.publicintegrity ··· oia/09.1 Statement of Facts.pdf.
said by Skippy25:

In my view and in many others, you are hiding your short comings
What "shortcomings," exactly, do you believe someone would be hiding if he didn't want to reveal all of the private information of his business in a way that would let large corporations destroy it? A lack of invincibility, perhaps?
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Re: Private data

You're being ridiculous in your nitpicking of privacy. Your business is a public business that is registered in the state which is public record and can be used by anyone to locate your business, the address, the contact information, and even you. So stop with the "oh my privacy" crap.

Where you provide service can easily be obtain as already pointed out by other users through basic research and investigating which involves absolute no illegal activity or breach of privacy. You call it a Trade Secret, I call it you being silly about wanting to hide your short comings.

Your shortcomings are your lack of coverage and as I pointed out before if the big bad large corp wanted to bring you down they can easily do so because you CAN'T hide where you are servicing and thus you CAN'T hide where you aren't servicing. I would be willing to bet you have a pretty good idea where your competitors are able to serve. Did you violate their privacy in getting that information? I would also be willing to bet every one of your competitors know where you are able to serve. Do you think they violated your privacy and broke laws to obtain that information?
SuperWISP

join:2007-04-17
Laramie, WY

Re: Private data

said by Skippy25:

You're being ridiculous in your nitpicking of privacy.
Actually you're making yourself look ridiculous -- or, at the very least, naive. You have obviously never run a business in a highly competitive field.
said by Skippy25:

Your business is a public business that is registered in the state
Bzzzt. Wrong. My state doesn't require businesses to register or be licensed. And even if it did, knowing the address of our office is not the concern here -- and you know it.
said by Skippy25:

Where you provide service can easily be obtain as already pointed out by other users through basic research and investigating
It's harder than you think. It would be tough to identify my signals and distinguish them from others. And there's certainly no reason to hand this information to my competitors on a silver platter.
said by Skippy25:

Your shortcomings are your lack of coverage
Oh? You know nothing about my business or the extent of my network's coverage. (Not that I intend to map it out for you.) Seems to me that you're throwing an irrational temper tantrum here.