U.S. Finally Tries To Figure Out Who Has BroadbandAfter years of relying on the FCC's rose colored glasses... ( old news - 02:08PM Monday Sep 29 2008) tags: fcc · business · wireless · statsFor the last decade the FCC's broadband data collection methodology has been largely a joke, which means that the agency has been making sweeping policy decisions based on incomplete data. In an effort to rectify this, the Senate last Friday passed the Broadband Data Improvement Act, which would get the GAO (outspoken critics of the FCC) and the census system more involved in broadband mapping, and provides grants to private-public mapping efforts (yes, that includes the controversial Connected Nation group). This is on top of the FCC's recent decision to bump the definition of broadband from 200kbps to 768kbps, and to ditch their flawed zip code measuring system (for years, the FCC insisted that one wired home in a zip code meant that entire zip code had broadband) for deeper census-track level reporting. The gist? In a few years we might actually know who has broadband and who doesn't, which might just lead to FCC decisions based on actual data. Maybe. Incumbent ISPs haven't been particularly forthcoming with broadband penetration data, and have fought those who try to obtain it in court. The bill also does little good if the groups they're giving grants to, like Connected Nation, are in fact simply incumbent ISP policy vessels tasked with putting on a good dog and pony show. Still, at least the country seems to have identified -- perhaps a decade too late -- that there's a problem with our approach to mapping. Related:- We Don't Need No Stinkin' DTV Delay
- Newsflash: FCC Shows Interest In....Factual Broadband Data
- 5 Signs Our Broadband Plan May Already Be In Trouble
- WSJ: AT&T Is Dying
- FCC To Probe AT&T, Verizon Wireless
- FCC Votes To Investigate Wireless Industry
- FCC Lusts After TV Industry Spectrum
- FCC Looking For White Space Database Administrators
|
  bobjohnson Premium join:2007-02-03 Titusville, FL 1 edit | Why not just as a part of the census?
They could always just add that as a box in the 2010 census... They have been trying to figure it out for years another year and a half won't hurt | |
|  |  SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19
| Re: Why not just as a part of the census? said by bobjohnson :They could always just add that as a box in the 2010 census... They have been trying to figure it out for years another year and a half won't hurt No thanks. The census is already a bloated, intrusive joke. Did you take a good look at the last one--since when does income, job occupation and all the other irrelevant questions that were asked qualify as a census? Last time I checked the Constitution, a "census" measured one thing: head count. Leave me alone. Measure BB penetration the old fashioned way. Use some of the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ that has already been pissed away on other "studies." | |
|  |  |   NetAdmin CCNA
join:2008-05-22
| Re: Why not just as a part of the census? said by SilverSurfer :No thanks. The census is already a bloated, intrusive joke. Did you take a good look at the last one--since when does income, job occupation and all the other irrelevant questions that were asked qualify as a census? Since it is useful to know that information. Where do you think information like median income or level of education come from, thin air? You might believe that data to be irrelevant, but contrary to what you believe, it is very important.
And last I checked, those question about income and education are completely voluntary. -- --- Eleven years of carrying The Clue Bat... | |
|  |  |  |  SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19
| Re: Why not just as a part of the census? said by NetAdmin :And last I checked, those question about income and education are completely voluntary. Clearly, you didn't read through the legalese thoroughly. No part of the last census was voluntary. Further, all those cute little "thin air" stats you mentioned can be just as easily ascertained via other channels, not the census since same was not ever set up to collect the other data which you seek.
Unless and until the Constitution to is amended by a 2/3rds vote, the census shall remain what it was originally set up to do: Count heads. | |
|  |  |  |  |   NetAdmin CCNA
join:2008-05-22
1 edit | Re: Why not just as a part of the census? said by SilverSurfer :Unless and until the Constitution to is amended by a 2/3rds vote, the census shall remain what it was originally set up to do: Count heads. Contrary that statement, the Constitution does permit the Census to do more than count heads... Read the actual text of the document:
Representation and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers ... . The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. See that part that says "in such Manner as they shall by Law direct" ? That basically means that Congress can, via legislation, add or subtract from the Census questions and information gathered. The Constitution only states that the Census MUST count people, but it does not prohibit or disallow further information to be gathered. -- --- Eleven years of carrying The Clue Bat... | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19
| Re: Why not just as a part of the census? said by NetAdmin :See that part that says "in such Manner as they shall by Law direct" ? That basically means that Congress can, via legislation, add or subtract from the Census questions and information gathered. Right. Operative words here: ...shall by law direct... What is the section of the federal body of statutes that specifically states that Congre$$ had added on the irrelevant questions in the Census? Oh that's right, they didn't. Those questions were added just because the whores' corporate masters wanted the data. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |   NetAdmin CCNA
join:2008-05-22
| Re: Why not just as a part of the census? said by SilverSurfer :What is the section of the federal body of statutes that specifically states that Congre$$ had added on the irrelevant questions in the Census? Oh that's right, they didn't. Check again.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_13_o···tes_Code
And see the section called legal mandate at »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta···s_Bureau
And you keep repeating that the statistics gathered are irrelevant... Maybe to you, but not to people who do policy and other types of research. -- --- Drilling for more oil is akin to giving a methhead the keys to the meth lab. | |
|  |  |  |   funchords Hello Premium,MVM join:2001-03-11 Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
| SilverSurfer is right about the mandatory part. Refusing or neglecting to answer is $100 fine, lying is $500. (13USC221)
This was the list of 2000 topics.
# Introduction
Includes: Federal Agency Abbreviations, Federal Users of Census Data; and Index to Questions Planned for Census 2000
# Basic Facts About Us
Includes: Age*; Gender*; Relationship*; Marital Status; Race*; Hispanic Origin*
# Income and Employment
Includes: Income; Labor Force Status; Industry, Occupation, and Class of Worker; Work Status Last Year; Veteran Status
# Transportation
Includes: Place of Work and Journey to Work; Vehicles Available
# Education
Includes: Education: Enrollment and Attainment
# Origins and Languages
Includes: Ancestry; Place of Birth, Citizenship, and Year of Entry; Language Spoken at Home
# Where We Move
Includes: Residence 5 Years Ago
# Disability and Caregivers
Includes: Disability; Grandparents as Caregivers
# Housing: Physical Characteristics
Includes: Year Structure Built; Units in Structure; Rooms; Bedrooms; Kitchen Facilities; Telephone Service Available; House Heating Fuel; Year Moved into Unit; Farm Residence
# Housing: Financial Characteristics
Includes: Tenure*; Value; Selected Monthly Owner Costs (Shelter Costs); Rent
»www.census.gov/dmd/www/content.htm -- Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
| |
|  |  |  |  |   bobjohnson Premium join:2007-02-03 Titusville, FL
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Why not just as a part of the census? said by funchords :said by bobjohnson :They could always just add that as a box in the 2010 census... They have been trying to figure it out for years another year and a half won't hurt I would worry a little about overloading the census, but I like this idea very much. It serves a couple of purposes in a very even-handed way. For example, how many residences have access to broadband vs. how many individuals do. Families and roommate situations tend to skew the numbers this way and that. Good idea, Bob! If the companies aren't cooperating then it's just one more box that narrows it down to at least 95% accuracy (Some people don't know what they have or have access to.) Then send a few foot soldiers on the taxpayers dime instead of the other ideas -- Any unauthorized copying or distribution of the opinion above constitutes stupidity and you should probably be punished
| |
|  |  |   DataDoc My avatar looks like me, if I was 2D. Premium join:2000-05-14 Greenville, NC
·Suddenlink
| Re: I don't have broadband said by Duramax08 :Theres one. Anyone else? Might aswell help out the FCC They're not listening. | |
|  |  |  stevephl
join:2000-11-27 Colorado Springs, CO | Re: I don't have broadband Who cares who has broadband, what good will the data do? There are bigger issues to worry about then who does or doesn't have broadband. | |
|  |  |  |   DataDoc My avatar looks like me, if I was 2D. Premium join:2000-05-14 Greenville, NC | Re: I don't have broadband Can I guess from your response you must already have it? Once we have the data maybe something will be done to get it for more people and businesses.
Broadband is for more than downloading porn and gamers. | |
|  |  |  |  Vespid
join:2002-09-24 Sharon, MA | great observation....and we should stop the Census Bureau from collecting all of that pesky geo-demographic data as well! | |
|  |  |  |   Boogeyman Drive it like you stole it Premium join:2002-12-17 Huntsville, AL | I agree that there are many larger problems than broadband availability, but just because there are bigger problems, doesnt mean we should ignore the small ones. -- Im Your Boogeyman, Thats What I Am | |
|  |  |  |  |  Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26 North Andover, MA | Re: I don't have broadband No we should ignore small problems until they become large problems, then start working on them when its too late. | |
|  |  |  |  bcoleman71
join:2007-09-18 Dallas, TX
| I for one care! One thing having accurate broadband penetration data will do is block an avenue of lies that the major broadband providers and their lobbyists try to sell to congress and everybody else about how much competition there is out there! Hopefully it will remove the avenue of lies they are telling about the "looming broadband apocalypse" and how we are "running out of bandwidth" as well. I hate to say this but this country is full of people who believe anything they hear on the news. They lack the ability to think critically about the information they are being sold on some of these so called "news shows".
Also, just because there is a financial meltdown in progress in this country does not mean we should take our eyes off of the broadband ball. If we let ourselves fall further behind the rest of the world, our ability to compete on a global scale will be hurt a lot worse than it is now. The lies that the major broadband providers and their lobbyists have been selling and spinning (and quite successfully I might add!) will eventually lead to the countries that get it right being the ones who will shape the future of the internet. Is that what you want to happen? You want to see us lose our competitive edge? This nation has always been on the forefront of innovation and unless we get these companies to start acting more in the interests of the general public that they serve, we will continue to lose our competitive edge to other nations and with that, the potential for new jobs that are created from the innovation will go with it will be lost (or severely reduced) as well! | |
|  |  |  |  |   Duramax08 Oh rly?
join:2008-08-03 San Antonio, TX
·Clearwire Wireless
·Juno Express
| Re: I don't have broadband "Also, just because there is a financial meltdown in progress in this country does not mean we should take our eyes off of the broadband ball"
Its a little to late. They took their eyes off the ball and now trying to fix the economy. They pretty much drop the broadband ball for the economic ball and work and work and work on it with nothing being accomplished. Eventually it will get fixed. Then something else is gona mess up and the government is just gona focus on that. The government to me is not a multi-tasking kind of guy. No wonder everything is screwed up as it is. We are way behind on the internet game, We are barely on the map. Even smaller countries got faster internet then all of us. Me? im still on dial up.
"FCC's recent decision to bump the definition of broadband from 200kbps to 768kbps"
IM STILL ON 56K LOL | |
|  |  |  |  |   broadbandforall
@direcpc.com
| i agree with you 100%,also im in georgia and we cant even get gas right now,and our state officials are calling for us to work from home 1 or 2 days a week,as our economy gets worse and worse more people need to be working from home and many can not do that with out broadband with out broadband for everybody in the us we will just keep falling behind,and as we all know this country needs all the help it can get | |
|  |  |  |  |  |   broadbandforall
@direcpc.com | Re: I don't have broadband also around here if your not within 2 1/2 miles from town you can not get cable or dsl satt. and dialup is our only option,and that is ridiculous that in 2008 cable and dsl hasn't expanded any farther than that | |
|  |  |  |  PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04 Banks, OR
1 edit | said by stevephl :Who cares who has broadband, what good will the data do? There are bigger issues to worry about then who does or doesn't have broadband. Congress ordered the FCC to care, in the 1996 Telecomm Act. If you don't think this should be U.S. policy, write yout Congresspeople. | |
|  |   Titus Pullo I came, I saw, I slept
join:2004-06-26 | Govt? Simple solution (Tubes = Tubes + 1) / (Googles - Teh_Emails); -- | |
|   pnh102 Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty Premium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| Just Close Congress Why is Congress bothering with this information?
Anyone who wants to find out if broadband is available at a given address can consult the various ISPs and find out for themselves.
Is Congress doing anything actually useful? Perhaps they should just take the next year off. -- "At the moment of conception." | |
|  |   Matt Take me down to the paradise city Premium join:2003-07-20 Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| Re: Just Close Congress said by pnh102 :Why is Congress bothering with this information? Anyone who wants to find out if broadband is available at a given address can consult the various ISPs and find out for themselves. Is Congress doing anything actually useful? Perhaps they should just take the next year off. The ISPs won't release the information. My guess is because even they don't know for the most part until a truck is rolled. -- Linux Haters Unite! | |
|  |  |   pnh102 Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty Premium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| Re: Just Close Congress said by Matt :The ISPs won't release the information. My guess is because even they don't know for the most part until a truck is rolled. »Re: Point Has Merit
People who want to know if broadband is available at a specific address can find the information themselves though. There's no need for Congress to intervene at all. -- "At the moment of conception." | |
|  |  |  |   Boogeyman Drive it like you stole it Premium join:2002-12-17 Huntsville, AL
| Re: Just Close Congress Except those sites arent always accurate either. I have personally seen cases where it said you could get broudband, signed up for it, then they told the subscribers that it wasnt possible. And I have seen where it says it wasnt available, only to call the local office and ask when it would be available and find out it has been available for over a year.
Granted this was 3 years ago, but I've heard similar anecdotes from others as recently as a few months ago. -- Im Your Boogeyman, Thats What I Am | |
|  |  bcoleman71
join:2007-09-18 Dallas, TX
| Like I stated above, making the information public will keep the ISPs and their lobbyists from lying about how well connected we, as consumers, already are and how much competition there is for us (the consumer). With that information being readily available, we (the consumer) and they (congress) will know for sure where and how much competition there is and who has access and who doesn't have access. After all, this is (supposedly) a government of, by, and for the people - not the lobbyists and their clients! It seems a lot of people have lost sight of that fact. | |
|  |  Sammer
join:2005-12-22 Canonsburg, PA
| said by pnh102 :Is Congress doing anything actually useful? Perhaps they should just take the next year off. Would you settle for at least a month, maybe three. Most members of Congress are hitting the campaign trail and may not be back until January. | |
|  beaups
join:2003-08-11 Hilliard, OH
| dumb when you live out in the country, you accept the fact that things are going to be different. I lived 40 miles from the city for YEARS and we finally got TW right before I moved. Frankly, I would've rather had CITY WATER, or CITY SEWAGE. I don't remember anyone surveying me on whether or not I had city water. anyhow I took care of all of that by MOVING. it was really quite simple. | |
|   Smoky Tom
@charter.com | U.S. Finally Tries to Fifure out who has broadband The question should be in two parts. Do you have broadband available, and do you have broadband? The first part is the most important for the FCC. Maybe a follow-up would be, if available, why do you choose to NOT use the service? | |
|  elray
join:2000-12-16 Santa Monica, CA
·SONIC.NET
·RoadRunner Cable
·Verizon Online DSL
| At what price? If rural folks (who are saving a bundle on real estate) won't bite on $50 satellite, how low is the price to go before it is considered ok?
Instead of trenching the whole countryside at $50K/address, maybe it would make sense to revive ISDN-BRI and IDSL, and declare 144K acceptable speed for those who won't pay more, and use some universal-service funds to make a national rate plan, say, $30/month?
(And yes, I know, I'm trying to go below $24.95 myself, but I paid $60/month for many years without complaining.) | |
|  | |  |
|
|