| PK has been trashing Connected Nation for years Public Knowledge -- an inside-the-Beltway lobbying organization funded by GoogleClick -- has long been trashing Connected Nation without good reason and merely seems to be continuing this vendetta (see »blog.apt.org/my_weblog/2008/01/d···-co.html for a history) with this latest salvo. Above all, it says, it doesn't want Connected Nation to do broadband mapping because it might keep some providers' private data, well, private.
There’s a good reason why ISPs — especially small, rural, and competitive ISPs — do not want precise maps of their coverage areas published: it enables anticompetitive tactics. Given detailed information about competitors’ coverage areas and sites (especially wireless ISPs’ towers), large incumbent carriers can precisely target anticompetitive tactics (e.g. predatory pricing, long term "lock in" contracts, etc.) at the areas which competitors serve, while not losing money on other areas. And since our country’s current broadband policy does nothing to aid these competitors in any way, they’re vulnerable. Want a duopoly? Gather competitive intelligence, at government expense, for the big guys — who will use it to wipe out all competitors. On the other hand, if you want users to have a choice of providers, or to foster the deployment of broadband to unserved or underserved areas, you’ll advocate exactly what "Connected Nation" does: map the general coverage areas but aggregate the information so that it cannot be used to harm competition. And keep the detailed, sensitive information that providers can't risk publishing under NDA. It just makes sense, and it's the only way to ensure that providers will be able to fully cooperate with a mapping effort. |
|
|
|
 radiowebstBrian Webster
join:2009-02-02
Cooperstown, NY | Brett,
My point is that the government has to release any data created using taxpayer funds. The taxpayer owns the data if they pay for the processes. There are plenty of methods for which to gather the information without the use of private data. In the case of WISP's, it could be drive testing signal levels. An effort could also be undertaken to do phone and mail surveys. Mapping those results with enough data samples can produce coverage areas. Other efforts such as using information a carrier puts out in advertising can also be manually mapped. The point being, that with 350 million dollars there are plenty of methods to indeed map broadband coverage, all of which can then be left in the public domain since it was gathered from public information in the first place. Spending that same amount of money to lock the information up under an NDA is just a waste of the funds.
As far as a carrier wanting to know a WISP coverage area to target them in a competitive fashion, it really doesn't take but a day or two to drive around with the proper RF gear, collect enough data points and use software to properly interpolate the data and show your coverage area. Using a reverse propagation and a list of tower sites, it's very easy to find your AP locations as well. To find out where cable is available, it can be as simple as driving around and looking at the poles for the wires. DSL is not much harder. You can look for DSL switches listed on this site and draw a 15,000 foot radius around it to get a pretty good idea of that footprint. None of these methods are perfect but neither are the methods used by Connected Nation. I get very tired of each carrier whining about their supposed protected information when there are a multitude of ways to get the same information in the public domain  Everyone needs to get over it, map the infrastructure and move on. Can you imagine if the government refused to let anyone map our road network? This is really the same thing when you use public funds for any projects. |
|
| An accurate census must always rely on confidentiality. said by radiowebst:Brett, My point is that the government has to release any data created using taxpayer funds. This is simply not so. If it were, the government would have to publish your tax return in its entirety every year -- as well as publishing, in personally identifiable form, any responses you might give to a census taker. |
|
 KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Nope. They don't have to do that, especially as it's held confidential... but they can and do release data demographics and earnings and taxes, you bet.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
|
|
| said by KrK:Nope. They don't have to do that, especially as it's held confidential... but they can and do release data demographics and earnings and taxes, you bet. Exactly. The government releases aggregated data and statistics, but not individually identifiable data. This is the same thing that Connected Nation does, and it is fine. In fact, I absolutely believe that this should be done.
I'm not in any way against the gathering of statistics on broadband coverage. However, as both a small competitor and a consumer who wants to have options, I am against having the government do competitive research on behalf of large carriers who could use the data to destroy competition. Some groups, such as broadbandcensus.com, advocate requiring the government to publish all of the providers' proprietary data. The people who advocate this tend to be inside-the-Beltway lobbyists who have never actually been a competitive business themselves and do not fathom how damaging it could be. |
|
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | The problem I see it is that IRS data should be just the facts. Connected Nations is, well, supporting their agenda... and no-one knows for sure how much distortion is in there.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
|
|
| Motivation to be accurate If it's a government contractor, Connected Nation has a strong motivation to be accurate. If it's not, it'll lose the contract.
What's more, there's no percentage in saying that an area is served when it's unserved. It would be hiding market opportunities from the companies that support it. |
|
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | said by SuperWISP:What's more, there's no percentage in saying that an area is served when it's unserved. It would be hiding market opportunities from the companies that support it. ... unless your goal was to prevent Government regulations that resulted in competition in areas where your members would like to see none....
Sometimes it's very important to paint a positive picture--- even if it's false--- to give the impression that that status quo is just fine, thank you very much. Admit the truth and it could result in unfavorable (for you or your benefactors) regulations and incentives for competition.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
|
|
