TechnicalJones.com

Author

Leroy Jones, Jr. is the creator of Talking Technology with Leroy Jones, Jr.

Recently in Internet Category

The Internet Game

| No Comments

Everyone knows that Washington, D.C. is a city that lives and dies with every move that their NFL professional football team makes 365/24/7. The mood of the entire city is set by how well the team playing. So it's interesting watching the political football game being played out on federal Internet policy issues. For nearly 20 years this issue has been one of the few issues that brought members of congress together.
 
Right now, the stakes are too high, particularly given next year's Federal auction of wireless spectrum to fuel mobile Internet growth. And now that the courts have been called upon to referee our Internet regulations (the third time in five years), Congress has a responsibility to weigh in and take action in a bipartisan way to ensure our policies can strengthen this amazing platform for telehealth and other applications that help improve the lives of Americans across the country.
 
This problem began in February when the FCC voted 3-2 along party lines to use Title II rules, written in 1934, to regulate the Internet as a public utility. The economic implications of that vote are huge.  Among industries that generate capital investment, only the energy industry surpasses broadband Internet deployment.  In fact, even when you include all industries, the top two investors in our nation's economy were broadband providers.  In 2013, broadband investment was $75 billion, up nearly 10 percent from 2012.
 
The FCC's action also shattered the previous bipartisan unity around a policy started during the Clinton Administration.  The short-term harm from the Commission's Title II vote is already apparent. The FCC has received multiple documented examples of compliance costs interfering with rural broadband improvement, and with these new rules potentially strangling innovation and investment, our diverse communities stand to suffer as broadband providers are now forced to rethink how much they should invest under this new bureaucratic scrutiny.
 
The brakes on the Internet's development seem inevitable. "We decline to adopt fixed, short deadlines for resolving formal complaints," the FCC's order says.  According to The Wall Street Journal, the FCC actually rejected a 90-day deadline for resolving complaints.
 
Other problems relate to the difficulties of applying rules from 1934 to modern technology.  Take Internet exchange, the complicated system that enables data consumers want to access on the Internet to cross multiple networks from various servers and Internet systems.  The FCC says that agreements must be "just and reasonable." But what is the definition of 'just and reasonable'?  Nobody knows.
 
If that sounds vague, here's how the Commission explains it: "While we have more than a decade's worth of experience with last-mile practices, we lack a similar depth of background in the Internet traffic exchange context."
 
Amid this bad news, a silver lining is emerging.  Leaders from both parties in Congress increasingly seem to recognize this threat to the Internet. A compromise involving "light touch" rules for tomorrow's technology cannot come too soon. As I've written (here and here), the growth of telehealth and mHealth could help millions gain affordable health care access, especially among our various diverse communities who need broadband access the most.  But telehealth and mHealth will only reach their potential if the Internet itself continues to grow and flourish.
 
The need for Congressional action is particularly important given the urgency of resolving legal uncertainties before next year's Federal wireless spectrum auction. The FCC, which is handling the auction, has now placed the mobile Internet - which had never been heavily regulated - under its wide thumb with the exact same rules enacted during the Great Depression. 
 
The response from Congress and consumers should be clear: No.  The same framework that brought us the wonders of the Internet and its empowering opportunities of free speech, civic engagement and educational pursuits should be the same rules that allow the Internet to thrive in the 21st century.  Rather than a forward-looking approach, the FCC decided to look backwards 100 years. 
 
Our system for overseeing the Internet, which worked so well for so long, has seemingly come apart.  It's time for Congress to come together and step up to protect the Internet and the opportunity for companies to invest and create new opportunities.


Protecting Tomorrow's Internet

| No Comments


The revolution in mobile healthcare continues to accelerate: More than 40 million smartphone owners now actively use at least one wellness or fitness app and by an overwhelming margin, they report that their health is improving because of it.


So why is the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) undercutting advances vital to this industry's progress?  And how quickly will Congress fix the problem?

 

Those two questions came to mind as I was reading a interesting new analysis of the FCC's recent vote to place the Internet under Title II utility regulations. With almost surgical precision, Internet analyst Larry Downes dissects the Commission's action, showing how the rules could violate multiple areas of federal law.

 

To give one example, the FCC redefined the entire Internet to make it part of the old, antiquated 1930s era telephone system and therefore subject the modern, dynamic Internet to these 1934 regulations.


As a result, Downes notes, every component on the Internet has been transformed into a telephone service and is therefore subject to utility regulation. The FCC, he warns, "can't rewrite the law by giving a key term an absurd new 'definition' [that contradicts] a consistent string of the agency's own precedents, and even basic rules of grammar."

 

The FCC's vote for Title II regulations will harm the Internet and, by extension, our access to new healthcare apps and services.

 

My hope is that Congress will work together to resolve these issues quickly so that needed improvements for both the Internet and telehealth technologies aren't delayed by the resultant legal uncertainties or by what is certain to be federal intrusion as, for the first time, layers of federal bureaucracy are added that impair innovators and their new ideas.


A Congressional action - narrowly focused to ensure Internet openness but without the overreach of Title II - would keep innovation moving.

 

Over the years, mobile and Internet-based healthcare services have emerged as an effective and affordable healthcare solution. As Commissioner Mignon Clyburn stated last fall, "Broadband-enabled solutions, can help communities better manage chronic disease, address language barriers, improve health literacy... and help improve overall population health and wellness."

 

While Commissioner Clyburn is right about the benefits of Internet healthcare, the FCC's decision to regulate the Internet under Title II authority will simply negate the progress made with these innovative services. That is why Congress must find a legislative solution that will combat the FCC's harmful policy and help mHealth programs become more effective.

 

The FCC's decision to regulate the Internet is a recipe for stale and uninspired innvovation. With the wireless Internet in particular, America is among the world's leaders and this has enabled our success in creating services to help seniors, people with chronic & debilitating diseases, and millions more who lack easy access to a doctor.

 

Congress has to both confirm and maintain America's leadership with online healthcare by working together to create and pass a law before the end of this year that extricates the Internet from Title II's overregulation but that permanently ensures an open Internet.


Congress must accept their responsibility to discourage and avoid the unnecessary years of legal wrangling with lawsuits after lawsuits that can be avoided. In the long run it is the consumers that will be the real winnner as innovators can return to what they do best - creating state of the art opportunities for consumers.

 

LJJ

(@TechnicalJones)



The Future of the Internet of Things (IoT)

| No Comments

A dazzling future was on display in Washington, DC last week at a Congressional hearing on the "Internet of Things" (IoT). The IoT is a network in which objects - vehicles, healthcare services, consumer goods, to name a few - are connected to the Internet in order to provide more valuable and efficient services. These emerging technologies combine with traditional manufacturing to produce a surge in economic opportunity, benefits in healthcare, infrastructure and the environment.


There's just one thing that possibly stands in the way of expanding this innovative technology to virtually all Americans: the new Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Internet regulation that could quite possibly inhibit innovation and investment in state-of-the-art Internet-based technologies both now and in the future.


The Committee heard testimony about developments taking place that would have seemed like science fiction 20 years ago: an automaker that wirelessly updates its cars' software to enable "self-driving," or a technology company that recently saw a $9 million return on a pilot program using connected machines to troubleshoot maintenance before problems arose.


As technology analyst Dan Castro testified that day, the IoT is a key to helping the U.S. upgrade its infrastructure. Investing in communications networks solves productivity and safety issues - in other words, helping to create jobs and improve our quality of life. Technology is clearly moving in a direction that plays to America's traditional economic strength: break-the-mold invention and innovation.


But there's a potential major problem confronting this progress: last month's FCC decision to place the innovative, fast-paced high-speed Internet - including the mobile web - under 80-year-old Title II utility style regulation. By its own admission, the FCC could not document a single violation since 2010 to justify regulating the Internet like a public utility. After decades of a bipartisan light touch that enabled the Internet to flourish to the Internet we enjoy today, this new federal micromanagement is unprecedented in Internet history.


That's why many are calling on Congress to intervene to both protect the Internet as we know it as well as to correct the FCC's overreach. Only an act of Congress would carry both the legal heft and certainty to protect the Internet and enable it's continue growth.  One of the driving catalysts of this call for legislative action is that the future build-out of America's high-speed Internet service will require tens of billions of private sector investment. Without this investment, consumers will not be able to experience the full benefits of the Internet of Things.


Facing the cold hard reality of many years of litigation as a result of the FCC's recent action, businesses will not have the certainty they need in order to invest this type of capital.


This new IoT revolution has the potential to touch and improve every part of the U.S. economy. At this critical time in our nation's technological advancement, our federal regulations should not be looking back just as the technology sector is working to move us forward.  If we are to see the full benefits these technological advances potentially promise, it's up to Congress to find a way to come together to move quickly and create a 21st century law for our 21st century Internet.



LJJ (@TechnicalJones)


Internet and Education

| No Comments

MERRY CHRISTMAS 2014

| No Comments


ChristmasTree_Dec 2008.jpg


MERRY CHRISTMAS TO YOU AND YOURS!!!

MERRY CHRISTMAS 2014

| No Comments


ChristmasTree_Dec 2008.jpg


MERRY CHRISTMAS TO YOU AND YOURS!!!

Internet Regulation: "Old School" or "New School"?

| No Comments


Should federal regulations designed for rotary telephones be expanded to cover our high-speed Internet use?  Incredibly, this question has become a serious issue in Washington, as supporters of Title II regulations promote the idea even in the face of new evidence that Americans do far more online than people in almost every other major country.


Congress drafted these rules during Franklin Roosevelt's presidency.  They were meant for the nation's emerging telephone service, which often involved placing calls through live operators and calling during the evening to save money on long-distance tolls.  Yet while these problems are thankfully long-gone, some want to apply these antiquated regulations to today's modern, competitive and diverse communication systems through the Internet.


The technological arguments against expanding Title II rules are obvious: High-speed Internet technologies are emerging everywhere, which is why Americans do so much more online than the Japanese, British, Canadians, West Europeans and many others. With all our choices for video streams, downloads, gaming, and cloud storage, Americans on average use more than double the data of the average Japanese or West European. Indeed, the average American Internet user generates more online data than users in all other major nations except South Korea.


The American Internet model is spurring remarkable social improvements. Nowhere is this more obvious than with advancements in home health care.  Patients suffering from diabetes, heart and kidney disease, which are leading causes of death in the African American community, are gaining direct benefits from real-time, Internet-based healthcare monitoring.

Regulations and bureaucratic red tape will inevitably slow this progress for no good reason.  Indeed, even those pushing for expanded online regulation acknowledge that there's no current problem.


Worse, like a bad Christmas gift, this one comes with a hefty price tag -  about $15 billion annually.  That's the total amount of new state and local taxes and fees that consumers will have to pay from this reclassification. Among the states hardest hit by these new taxes and fees are California, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Illinois.

For anyone with a smartphone or home Internet connection, the stakes are significant. Expanded regulation would mean new taxes and fees - and people on fixed income would also be hit hard by the new costs, which will average $72 per year for each wireless connection and $67 for wired service.


The most puzzling aspect of this issue, aside from the fact that there isn't a practice that anyone in the debate is pointing to as evidence for this change, is that it detracts from a much more important issue.  Our focus should be trained on promoting better and faster Internet service for all, particularly for unserved and underserved communities.  As Internet networks become more accessible, it will spur ongoing advances in affordable health care that can unlock huge benefits, particularly for those who cannot easily visit a doctor's office.


This much is clear: Americans deserve an open Internet.  They deserve to access whatever legal content they choose without anyone interfering.  But applying a set of rules from the 1930s to achieve this is guaranteed to produce more expensive Internet access.  There has to be a better way!


Thankfully for us, we have that better way.  In rendering an opinion on FCC net neutrality rules in January, the Court laid out a pathway under Section 706 of the Communications Act that would protect the Internet, and ensure that the broadband networks we need built out nationwide would have the best chance to happen.  Section 706 provides the best, and least intrusive, means of protecting the wonderful Internet world we all enjoy, and continuing to bring us the benefits we enjoy today.



LJJ (@TechnicalJones)


Consumer Networks

| No Comments

Memorial Day 2014

| No Comments

@TechnicalJones: African Americans, Jobs and the Internet

| No Comments

Joint Center Report 2013: African Americans, Jobs and the Internet

 

The Internet is quickly becoming the indispensable tool for millions of Americans seeking a better job - or any job. 

 

Following up on my initial blog post yesterday morning, that's the inescapable conclusion of a new report the Joint Center published this week about the Internet and employment.  This jobs-Internet connection was also the focus of this morning's Joint Center panel discussion featuring FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn and the Joint Center's John Horrigan, who analyzed the survey data and authored the report.

 

As Commissioner Clyburn said at the outset of her remarks, broadband access, which is the enabler of new technologies, is no longer a luxury, it's a necessity.  Commenting on the survey's conclusions, she also emphasized the FCC's role in promoting more - and more affordable - broadband access.

 

Dr. Horrigan discussed the report's findings at length, relating it to other data concerning broadband adoption and use.  As he noted, African-Americans in particular seem to be interested in more than just search engines.  They are increasingly using social networking to expand their network of job contacts and improve the probability of finding out about job opportunities.

 

The Joint Center's report is based on a survey of 1,600 Americans concerning their use of wired and mobile broadband, particularly in researching employment opportunities.  Among the survey's most important conclusions: African Americans are more likely than other segments of the population to use the Internet to seek and apply for employment.  They are more likely to consider the Internet "very important" to the success of their job search.

 

Also speaking at yesterday's panel discussion were Chanelle Hardy from the National Urban League, AT&T's Ramona Carlow, Zack Leverenz, CEO of Connect2Compete, and Jason Llorenz of the Latino Information Network at Rutgers University.

 

Overall, this was a great event and the Joint Center is extremely proud of Dr. Horrigan's report and the important issues it raises.  As he said toward the end of the session: digital skills are important, so investing in digital skills can help expand opportunity for all- and for African-Americans in particular.

 

It is important that government and industry continue to work with communities across the country to support digital literacy programs and that that commitment go hand-in-hand with public and private sector investment in high-speed broadband to every corner of America.

 

Leroy Jones, Jr.

(@TechnicalJones)


Enhanced by Zemanta

Main Index