Watering the Net Roots

On the one hand, you can look at Verizon's dumping of rural New England business as a kind of red-lining. On the other hand, listen to what the company picking up the dumped business says it wants to do. According to the Boston Globe,

...the merger will likely benefit rural customers by putting them in the hands of a company that specializes and focuses on rural markets, according to John Byrne, analyst at Technology Business Research in New Hampshire.

Verizon serves 1.5 million access lines, 180,000 DSL customers, and 600,000 long-distance customers in the three states. The company offers DSL Internet access to about 60 percent of households there. In contrast, FairPoint offers DSL access to about 80 percent of households it serves.

But in southern New Hampshire, where FairPoint will take over the high-speed FiOS fiber-optic network available to 80,000 households, customers who may have expected to see FiOS TV offerings won't likely see "triple-play" bundles of voice, television, and Internet in the near future.

"Clearly, video will be a consideration, but we don't want to get distracted by that," as FairPoint takes over, Leach said. "We are going to increase high-speed data right out of the box."

Kurt Adams, chairman of the Public Utilities Commission in Maine, said he cannot comment on details, but that merger hearings would likely focus on broadband investment, service quality, and rates.

Something big is getting missed in the fight between carriers and local governments, and many side-takers on both the right and the left are equally blind to it. What's missed is serious and widespread market demand for high-speed data connections — specifically connections that are not subordinated to television.

No doubt about it: consumer demand for TV is still huge, and will stay huge for a long time. But producer demand is for high-speed Internet. That goes for approximately all of the connected business population, plus the growing number of consumers that now also produce — and will increasingly produce video they'll want to share, and perhaps even sell. Significantly, this demand includes the production side of the incumbent entertainment industry as well. Here in Santa Barbara, the demand for higher-speed Internet is driven to a large degree by filmmakers and production professionals who would rather work from home than drive down to Hollywood.

Municipal, county and state governments (and regulatory bodies like the PUC in Maine), are responding to their consituents demands when they do their best — in many different ways, across the country — to represent and support that demand.

One can argue that some of this support is misguided. In fact, I'm one of those who argues that local governments make a mistake when they offer "triple play" services identical to those of the incumbent carriers — even when the incumbents (as in the case of Verizon in New England) have effectively red-lined their districts.

But the fact remains that the demand is there. And most of it is coming from the private sector. That is, business.

Fat-pipe high-speed Internet is good for all business. Not just for incumbent TV and telephone companies.

Many on the left don't see what's happening because they're too busy wanting to protect consumers from big bad heartless companies. Their pro-Net sympathies are on the side of social benefits and personal freedoms — mostly of self-expression. They tend to turn blind eyes toward business in general. To many on the extreme left business is evil and we need government to protect us from exploitation by business.

Many on the right don't see what's happening because they're too busy protecting business from government in general. They recognize and value the importance of business, and credit it with social as well as economic benefits. When fights break out between business and government, they'll naturally side with business. That's what they're doing in the carriers' fight against lawmakers favoring Net Neutrality (which would impose restrictions on what carriers can and cannot do) — and in the separate but not distinct fight between the carriers and the "munis": local and regional government-led efforts to bypass the carriers in providing high-speed Internet connections and services. By seeing the two fights as one, folks on the right miss seeing the real market demand, by business, for high-speed Internet connectivity.

Several things need to happen here.

First, the Net Neutrality debate needs to be quarantined at the federal level. It may be a national debate with local implications, but the battle itself is a federal regulatory one, and should be confined as much as possible to Washington. It is especially important here for the right-vs.-left side-taking not to continue bleeding down to the state, regional and local levels.

Second, folks on the right and the left should both recognize high-speed Internet market demand as something that primarily arises from local businesses (including small and home offices) — and that this demand will only increase as more consumers become producers and look for high-speed connections that serve production as well as consumption. Everybody needs to see that serving this demand is good for the economy, for society, and for individuals.

Third, state, local and regional governments need to create regulatory environments that are friendly to high-speed Net build-out by everybody, including individuals and businesses of all sizes.

Fourth, we should support and encourage infrastructure development companies that prioritize around demand for high-speed Internet rather than television. Fairpoint is one of them, and they should be saluted for their good efforts.

Fifth, the growth of independent "netcos" should be supported. In the January issue of Linux Journal, I wrote about Indienet.dk, a local Linux-based Danish company that's in the business of providing pure Internet transport:

Although they support VoIP phones, they don't sell VoIP as a service. Nor do they sell TV. (Those last two combine with Net service to form the familiar "triple play" of offerings that telcos, cablecos and many of their new muni competitors are pushing in the US.) "We're bottom level", says Jakob Frederiksen, our host and the company's sales and service chief. "We just provide the base-level connectivity."

Indienet is able to thrive in a business environment that is far less regulated than ours in the U.S. Last September I was led to explore this environment by my friend Thomas Madsen-Mygdal, who introduced me to players at the backbone as well as the local level. Here's what I discovered:

Among wholesale transit providers are TDC, which for many decades was Denmark's national PTT (which stood for Postal Telegraph and Telephone, and generically still stands for the old state-owned communications companies). Later, Thomas and I spoke at length with TDC's Per Rasmussen, who made it clear just how complex and competitive the market for Internet deployment and service has become.

For example, in suburban and rural areas, the old cable television head ends are being put to new use by the communities themselves. It's easy to forget today that what we now just call “cable” began as CATV, or Community Antenna TV. In Denmark as well as in the US and elsewhere, cable got its start when communities — on their own or with the help of specialized contractors -- put up towers and antennas at some central point (usually where the antennas could see the originating transmitters of TV signals), and amplified those signals down coaxial cabling to the houses of customers. Today, Per explains, these old cables (and newer ones too) are being repurposed for Internet service, with telephony and television riding on top of the Net as services. Meanwhile, a large number of private electric power companies, leveraging war chests of cash gained from selling their power plants, are getting into the phone/Internet/TV triple-play business, driving fiber down many last miles to many homes. With their smaller cash reserves, companies like TDC have to be more careful about how and what they deploy, along with whom and what they connect to.

What gets Thomas most excited is users owning their own infrastructure, and the opportunities for small grass-roots companies like Indienet to grow the Net “from the outside in” -- from customers at the edges toward the backbones. All the market fragmentation and competition, he says, serves to force vertical integrators to unbundle their offerings.

Not surprisingly, Denmark is #1 in household broadband penetration, and also leads in broadband take-up. Here's how one report summarizes it.:

South Korea at 26 % penetration has lost its lead to three Western European countries: Denmark with 26.5%, Iceland at 26.4%, and the Netherlands at 26.35%. South Korea grew by a negligible amount of 3.1% while Denmark led the top five countries growing by 31.5% over the past year. The US is 19th overall with 16.61 broadband lines per 100 inhabitants behind Luxembourg, and just ahead of Macau.

You can find more stats here.

This isn't to say that Big Ideas aren't worth fighting over, or that we shouldn't fight for the Net at the federal level. Those fights are hugely important. I think the market-hostile PERFORM act, which is led by Sen. Feinstein (D-CA) and requires building DRM in to satellite and Internet radio (on behalf of the RIAA and little else), is one of the most dangerous bills working its way through Congress right now. The unintended consequences of this for grass-roots action on the Internet are profound. As Don Marti puts it, The weird angle on this is that she's selling out the netroots scene that helped get her party a majority in Congress. If she gets it passed, the database marketing crowd gets to control politics in the USA again, and she's back in the minority.

It's the grass roots that matter. That's where growth starts, that's where society lives, and that's where there are plenty of pro-Net causes we can all get behind, regardless of how our politics lines up.

______________________

Doc Searls is Senior Editor of Linux Journal

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

We think this is an

Home Refurbish Course's picture

We think this is an inspiring article.

Real Broadband access

Joe Klemmer's picture

I would almost kill for a real 'Net link. Right now I have only three choices; Comcast cable, Verizon DSL & a T1. Over the last 4 years I have tried to get a DSL line three times. Verizon can not provide me working service (don't even get me started). There's no way I can afford $300/mo for a T1 so I have to resort to cable. Now this wouldn't be a big deal except that I have a little server running with some family stuff and a few things I've donated like mailing lists and ftp space and such. This box is currently colo'd about 1.5 to 2 hours away. Over the last few years my health has become such that I am not able to drive anymore. If I could get a simple synchronous 'Net serves from someone I'd be ecstatic. Hell, it doesn't even need to be broadband. But Comcast is only for inbound, not for services. Oh they have a "business" plan but you can't run any http on it. So I am stuck with this "service".

--
Indie Game Dev and Linux User
Contact Info: http://about.me/joeklemmer
"Running Linux since 1991"

I had a similar experience.

Anonymous's picture

I had a similar experience. In my country, Broadband came just in 2004. It was very expensive initially. I remember paying $175 a month to stay on a 128 kbps line which would give me 16 kbps download speed. Slowlt the situation improved and today I am a on 256 kbps unlimited for 20 USD. Hopefully, it will get even better.

Getting even cheaper now...

Computer Game Cheats's picture

There are so many to choose from these days. The only problem is you have to read the "fine print" as in the bid to retain customers, some of the proviers have ridiculous opt-out clauses. Overall, it's better for the consumer. I pay less than $10 for mine

Comcast stuff

Anonymous's picture

If you have comcast, you do have some upload speed, depending
on the plan.

It is fast enough to upload content to your server by ftp. You should
not have to drive to your server to update it. Remote access should
be available.

You can use a tool such as NVU to build new web pages and update
current ones. Other types of content like images, software, etc,
you should be able to upload.

I am not aware of comcast blocking ftp ports. Just make sure your
firewall is not doing the blocking.

I would give my contact info in this post, but I am paid by an out-
sourcing multinational to support Comcast services. I will attempt
to monitor this post.

The caveat is always that I could be wrong. But I would be interested
in knowing if you were able to do any ftp.

Also be aware that the injunction against running a server is due
to the fact that servers eat up bandwidth, which is a shared
resource.

And because of liability issues, Comcast service - cable, internet
and even the digital voice service, is only of utility for home use.
That means that they cannot guarantee 100 percent up time, even for
the digital voice phone service. You need to be aware of this.

The voice modems are a little less resilient when connected to home
wiring and the various home telephone, answering machine and fax sets.
Also, there may need to be cable upgrades whether from your home to
the pole or pedestal, or from that point back to the head end. Only
using that service under day-to-day conditions will show the
weakness.

For the persistent, the payoff is in increased competitiveness.

not worth it

linux roots's picture

$300/mo for a T1 is not worth it, you can get a managed hosting for your
business and pay someboby manage the services for you, it cost lot less than $300/month

I feel your pain

Doc Searls's picture

Six years ago I moved to Santa Barbara from Woodside, in Silicon Valley (of all places) because the connections in Woodside were so slow and sucky.

The problem is that, for much or most of the country, the best we can do is live with whatever the telco/cableco duopoly offers us. We need to open the markets up, and they won't open as long as we retain this unholy alliance between carrier money and congressional votes.

Doc Searls is Senior Editor of Linux Journal

White Paper
Linux Management with Red Hat Satellite: Measuring Business Impact and ROI

Linux has become a key foundation for supporting today's rapidly growing IT environments. Linux is being used to deploy business applications and databases, trading on its reputation as a low-cost operating environment. For many IT organizations, Linux is a mainstay for deploying Web servers and has evolved from handling basic file, print, and utility workloads to running mission-critical applications and databases, physically, virtually, and in the cloud. As Linux grows in importance in terms of value to the business, managing Linux environments to high standards of service quality — availability, security, and performance — becomes an essential requirement for business success.

Learn More

Sponsored by Red Hat

White Paper
Private PaaS for the Agile Enterprise

If you already use virtualized infrastructure, you are well on your way to leveraging the power of the cloud. Virtualization offers the promise of limitless resources, but how do you manage that scalability when your DevOps team doesn’t scale? In today’s hypercompetitive markets, fast results can make a difference between leading the pack vs. obsolescence. Organizations need more benefits from cloud computing than just raw resources. They need agility, flexibility, convenience, ROI, and control.

Stackato private Platform-as-a-Service technology from ActiveState extends your private cloud infrastructure by creating a private PaaS to provide on-demand availability, flexibility, control, and ultimately, faster time-to-market for your enterprise.

Learn More

Sponsored by ActiveState