Art

Furthermore, the argument that ‘competition’ would disappear is CRAZY. Basically, the telecom industry is arguing from the broken window fallacy as pointed out by the French economist Frederic Bastiat–a broken window is NOT good, even though it forces people to put more money in the economy. This is because that money would go ELSEWHERE–if the money isn’t being spent on shitty telecom services, it could be spent on OTHER things. Thus, competition for competition’s sake is ridiculous and doesn’t help anyone. The competition would simply shift to another sector (perhaps creation of new phones that don’t use awful proprietary tech?)

Also, most people seem to forget what this might offer for cell users. MORE MONEY IN YOUR POCKETS. VOIP as used in many home phones is very, very cheap. There is NO reason why we couldn’t use VOIP on next-generation phones on an open-content wireless network. Cheap, international, unlimited calling–sign me the fuck up.

Jack

For example - “The 700 MHz slice of the spectrum is apparently pretty good to offer broadband, since it can penetrate walls and other obstacles.” - this is simply not true. UHF is refracted less by water than higher frequencies, so it is less effected by the moisture in foliage. This is why it is better for ota tv and broadband delivery.

It is often worse at getting in to the home, especially at short distances, because TV wavelenghts can be wider than metal windows or the new studs used in walls, which block the rf in the same way the mesh on the glass on a microwave stop you from being cooked in your kitchen.

If the FCC sets up the auction and requires a Regional (SE) bid it will effectively limit who can bid (Big boys only) vs opening it up to Local market coverage.

The likes of Google already own the Nationwide Backbone (Fiber) and Internet Access piece as well as all the Content so all they need to rule this end to end network is a partnership with the locals. RBOC/Independants and or MSO.

Jacomo