data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/bd261/bd2616c826dd66246179674c603c69fda9c145b9" alt="United States United States"
White House Wants 3G Bandwidth 74
MikeD--NULL writes "President Clinton urges the departments of commerce and defense to identify spectrum suitable for upcoming 3rd generation wireless technology. The 700MHz freed from TV's transition to digital appears to be insufficient. This along with the any new found spectrum will be auctioned off on March 6, 2001. Better start saving now."
Re:Article title is a little semantically confusin (Score:1)
Besides, 3 gigs would be written 3 Gb... or 3 Gbps. :)
Re:the war continues (Score:1)
By DOD Lobbiests, I mean the military-industrial companies that want to sell very expensive equipement with very high margins to the DOD instead of low margin (relatively) commercial/industrial goods.
Any way this works, we still don't win. Has anyone a URL on 'lease' lengths?
Re:Article title is a little semantically confusin (Score:1)
Re:This is cool, but... (Score:2)
These are not royalty free technologies. They all require the licensing of patents.
GSM is obsolete and inferior to CDMA. DAB is a failure. DVB-T is the only technology listed that would be good for the USA. Unfortunately, the FCC still believes that ATSC (8-VSB) can be made to work, even though everyone else has jumped ship.
Re:auctions are illegal...and ham radio will lose (Score:2)
Except that the Congress passed some laws in the '90s explicitly authorizing auctions of spectrum by the FCC. So unless the Radio Act became a part of the Constitution while nobody was looking, they are absolutely legal.
Steven E. Ehrbar
Re:This is cool, but... (Score:1)
UMTS is an evolution of GSM, but the radio link technology may be either Time Division Duplex or Frequency Division Duplex. Most systems in planning, including NTT DoCoMo's version (which is scheduled to go online spring next year), use Wideband Code Division Mutiplexing Access or W-CDMA for the radio link. Obviously, W-CDMA is a CDMA technology. However, most implemntations currently strive to avoid Qualcomm's intellectual property.
Furthermore, GSM is much further ahead in implementing so called 2.5 Generation technologies, examples being EDGE (Enhanced Data rates for Global Evolution) and GPRS(General Packet Radio Service).
The actual standards and specifications can be found at the 3GPP (Third Generation Partnership Project)website (http://www.3gpp.org). 3GPP, a consortion of several large telecommunications bodies has also been given stewardship of GSM.
In any case, most of the major American equipment manufacturers are involved in UMTS- Lucent, Nortel (yes, I know they're Canadian), Motorola, etc.
Re:merit not auction (Score:2)
Assuming arraycomm is willing to sell their technology for something under about 40 times the cost of the bandwidth, I don't see why the winners of the bandwidth auction wouldn't also buy arraycomm's technology. Unless of corse arraycomm's technology turns out to be a sham. Or works, but is extreamly costly to deply. Or works in the lab, but is screwed by some real life effects (multipath reflection, flying birds, tastyness of equiptment to crawly things). Or someone else doesn't come up with something better.
If the ability to serve 20 milion households is worth $2b, the ability to serve 400 million is surely worth much more.
Re:Free Market (Score:1)
Re:What did he say? (Score:1)
This is old, so no one will likely read this, and not to be redundant, but...
The spectrum is referring to the Radio Frequency (RF) spectrum of the electromagnetic spectrum, by which we propagate our transmissions. The FCC sells certain sections of the EM spectrum to certain utilizations: for instance, the 10m wavelength of radio frequency transmission is used by amateur radio operators.
It's okay (Score:1)
Don't worry. All those amateaur bands in the radio can just post their music on Napster...
Oh wait! I get it now... :)
--
Neafevoc
Re:Xeno's Paradox (Score:1)
x->[infinity]
Re:Free Market (Score:2)
When you have cellular companies throwing ridiculous amounts of cash to the government for licenses, who you think ends up paying the bill? The consumer of course, so the auctions are just an indirect form of tax.
The cellular companies over here spend $35 Billion to get their licenses, this means they've gotta charge the consumer extortionate amounts of money to get a return on investment, the companies themselves have just thrown themselves into huge amounts of debt without really knowing the uptake of 3G services, while the government is sitting pretty with its huge wad of cash.
Re:I noticed that too. (Score:1)
Re:This is cool, but... (Score:1)
White House wants 3 G of bandwidth? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
merit not auction (Score:2)
Re:What did he say? (Score:1)
defense to identify spectrum suitable, this probably just means the celluar companies are probably looking for a suitable high frequency allotment of the specrum since they'd be able to carry more data.
Re:auctions are illegal...and ham radio will lose (Score:1)
In any case, you have completely misunderstood what I have said. Licenses in the past have not been franchises or concessions. The purpose of the FCC was not to enrich the government, it is to facilitate communications for the common good. The application of fees is designed to put some of the financial burden of the FCC's investigation of the claims of the public good served by a license applicant upon the applicant themselves. This had a secondary purpose of helping to prevent frivolous applications, and frequency hoarding. The natural progress of bureacracy, it seems, is towards greater complexity but decreasing efficiency, and license fees and processes created a significant burden for legitimate users. Several attempts at reform have been variously successful.
Evidently some person who thought themselves really clever in inventing a capitalist (note: NOT free market) scheme for frequency allocation that would enrich the goverenment instead of costing it money in bureacratic costs. This is how the spectrum auctions were born. The precedent set with these auctions is very harmful to private and public good for all but a few of the very largest corporations.
I wonder if anyone has heard of a man named Ivar Kreuger, who was known in the 1920's as 'The Swedish Match King'. Kreuger would lend money to unethical or desperate rulers or many counries, on the condition that he be given a complete monopoly on the production and sale of matches. This made Krueger an economic wunderkind of that naieve era. However, his empire later crashed and burned, possibly as a consequence of the great 1929 crash but also possibly because a country with such a tax, devistating to the poor, impoverished the country to the point where loans could no be repaid.
This is an example of a Concession, or franchise. That is, the government deprives its citizens/vassals of a right, in exchange for some benefit that it gains. Another example is the British East India Company, who was given an exclusive right for trade with the East Indies in exchange for a large sum paid to the Crown. The crown, and the Company, were enriched to the detriment of the English people and to the near complete destruction of the East Indies.
A student of history should come to the conclusion that a government must be very careful when giving concessions/franchises to companies. An ethical government will not sell out its citizens rights for simple 30 pieces of silver. When Vail's AT&T was given certain rights of monopoly in the US, it was a carefully considered bargain that served to expand and rationalize the telephone system. However, this concession was greedily defended long after it had outlived its usefulness, and its influences are still being felt today, 17 years after the Bell System breakup.
Another example of a concession that has been successful in some ways but is becoming completely out of control is the patent system. In exchange for complete description of an invention, the government grants the rights of exclusive rights to profit from that invention for a limited period of time. The inventor is enriched to a reasonable degree based upon the market value of the invention, while the public is let in on the secret of how it works. It is, in theory, a fair trade, though one can say that the devil is in the details.
What will happen to these frequency sales? I don't see how they serve the public good in any way besides lining the pockets of the government which is selling things that are not its to sell.
Nobody will lease the spectrum... (Score:1)
White House Wants Gigabit Bandwidth (Score:1)
birthday present! (Score:1)
"Mom, can I borrow the frequency spectrum tonight? I've got a hot date."
Xeno's Paradox (Score:2)
At what point do you begin sending pulses so frequently that you are effectively transmitting continuously?
The New standrads (Score:1)
There are two groups of standards being set up for 3rd Generation wireless. The first standard-type is UMTS/WCDMA, which is based primarily on GSM technology. The second standard- type is cdma2000, which is based on CDMA (Qualcomm, IS95) technology.
Japan's DoCoMo (I wish we had their I-Mode technology in the US) is set to deploy their WCDMA technology next spring, with a full rollout a few months later. In fact, NEC and Fujitsu have delivered equipment, and are already scheduled to go into production.
European trials of UMTS/WCDMA are scheduled for a year later.
Re:Free Market (Score:1)
It really makes me laugh, when the telco's starts telling sob stories, on how cruel and unfair, such an auctioning system is, and how they only wants the spectrum to serve the public good, etc. I really understand them, when try to get the spectrum for free, but why should they?
Of course are they going to pass the bill to the consumers. But competition ensures, that the price of service, stays within the limits of what the consumers want's to pay. And only those citizens, who actually uses and benefits of the spectrum, will pay, whether _all_ citizens gain the benefit from the auction, which I think is a fair deal.
There is one other thing, that I like with the auctioning system; and that is, that it is a transparant system for everybody; The public gets to know exactly what they got, for their commen property, instead of a murky kludge of semi political deals, and overhead of controlling those deals. And the companies are free to do their investments and R&D, where they think they get the best deals, instead of where forced to do it, because of political deals.
There is a fortune to be made in the wireless marked, and thats why the telcos pay so comparativly much money.
Re:This is cool, but... (Score:2)
I don't think that this is a good idea. It's kinda analogous to saying "We should all abandon all Operating Systems except Windows, so that software will run on all machines." I personally think that competition is good for *most* industries, and the cell phone industry is no exception. When two standards are competing, they will try & provide us with the services *we* want the most.
Get rid of the mish-mash of competing standards and you'll probably free up tons of bandwidth.
This is *totally* true. When you have two types of cells (such as CDMA->GSM) in a close frequency range, you need about 270KHz to seperate them (on both sides, for a total of just over
Re:Will getting rid of broadcast TV help? (Score:1)
Re:White House wants 3 G of bandwidth? (Score:1)
A redundant post like this one: -1 karma point.
A couple of hits from the old crack pipe: 0 karma points.
An AC that actually has a point: priceless.
Sorry, couldn't resist...
Billy Clinton and Porn (Score:2)
We all know he's just going to use it to download more porn...
Rock 'n Roll, Not Pop 'n Soul
Free Market (Score:1)
Let the free market decide!
Re:mmm (Score:1)
echo "</i>" >> story
Why? (Score:2)
Sorry, cheap shot, couldn't resist.
Re:Why Not Lease? (Score:1)
You appear to be operating under the delusion that the government (at least the current one....)
has any interest in 'ensuring the public good', as opposed to, oh say lining the pockets of
companies that they hope will pay them big fat speakers fees as soon as they leave office
Why Not Lease? (Score:1)
Wouldn't the government then have a consistent source of income rather than a once off payment?
Make more of the spectrum we have... (Score:2)
They've got a technology to use the spectrum differently. Right now, information is transmitted by sending out continuous waves while modulating their frequency, and we've pretty much reached the limit of how much information we can send in one chunk of the spectrum.
These guys have a totally different idea [time-domain.com] -- instead of a continuous wave, they use wave pulses, millions pers second or more, I think, to transmit the information.
Any physics folks here have any idea about the potential? They claim it has a lot.
Article title is a little semantically confusing (Score:4)
When I first saw this post, I thought it was suggesting that the actual White House itself needed 3 Gigs of Bandwidth...I was wondering why that would be so important?
If all those OC-3s can be installed before Jan 20th, Bill Clinton can enjoy some streaming mp3s together with "www.rolypolygirls.com"...
But it turns out this is just some boring article about the future of our nations infrastructure, blah blah blah.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
higher speed, higher definition TV...... (Score:1)
That or Bill Clinton really wants to reach out and feel the Bunnies on the Playboy channel.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re:auctions are illegal...and ham radio will lose (Score:1)
Handing the airwaves over to commercial entities is protecting them from exploitation?...like pimps protect prostitutes!
This is cool, but... (Score:5)
It still leads us to one problem, though. When the FCC designed the first Cell-phone networks in the 800MHz area (The A & B channels), they allotted 10MHz to each carrier (local phone company + one competitor). As useage was increasing, the government allotted 2.5MHz more to each carrier. Except that they didn't give 2.5MHz "chunks" but they split it up how it was distributed. Now here's what the bandwith looks like:
-------------------------------------------
|A''(1MHz) | A (10)| B (10) | A' (1.5)| B'(2.5) |
-------------------------------------------
Because of the location of A', the US wireless system is relagated to using technologies that fit in that 1.5MHz chunk. With CDMA 2000 coming out soon, it is close to the theoritical capacity of the airwaves. Hopefully the government will give some of the 700MHz range to the carriers in the 800MHz zone and require that they no longer update the technology on the 800MHz frequency. Maybe that way we can have even more bandwith!
Re:Why Not Lease? (Score:1)
Re:It's getting closer (Score:1)
Email me if you've got an answer...
Will getting rid of broadcast TV help? (Score:1)
How much bandwidth will that give us? If it's enough so that I can have a 1Mbps wireless data link wherever I go, it's worth it.
Axel
Re:This is cool, but... (Score:2)
Since they can just make a phone that will work in numerous countries, the manufacturer knows the phone will sell lots of units and generate lots of profits, also the technology advances further so you get smaller/lighter phones. What incentive does a manufacturer have to spend $$ million developing a product which it knows will only sell to a limited/incompatible market?
In the US the FCC didn't mandate any sort of standard though, apart from controlling the frequency allotments. They went for the model where companies would just compete with incompatible standards until a winner was found. Nice idea and very free market orientated, however it never worked out and as you say it just left a mix of incompatible networks, and created a lot of politics and arrogance on the part of the competing companies.
Say company A has invested xx billion on developing a standard and installing networks nationwide, why would they decide to concede to company B's standard then have to replace their entire network and also pay royalties to company B for their technology? As you can see, you just end up with a deadlock, where each company is intransigent.
So, when the FCC is counting its numerous coffers generated from the auctions, it would be wise of them to make sure a common, royalty free standard is adopted by the providers. This may sound like I want the FCC to dictate standards to private industry (bad government?), however the companies should take a lesson from history and form a joint working group and develop some form of synergy. It might be a good idea to adopt the new UMTS standard from the GSM group, and while they're at it, the DAB digital radio standard, also the DVB digital tv standard, but these are royalty free technologies from Europe, which means no royalties for US companies and a shed load of jingoism/politics. Oh well.
Az.
executive memorandum (Score:1)
Re:3G (Score:1)
Re:okay, okay. (Score:1)
Re:Why Not Lease? (Score:1)
It's not content that is for or against the public good, but rather behaviors that violate the licences to use the spectrum. For example, using a device that interferes with competing technology.
Anyway, it does make to much sense for the gov't to lease. I know its money that calls the shots, but if the idea is floated, maybe the mainstream will get a clue.
Re:and ham radio will lose (Score:1)
Re:Make more of the spectrum we have... (Score:1)
It's not Morse code. Morse code is actually a form of entropy coding (like Huffman coding, if you've heard of it). Entropy coding is a way of coding symbols (like letters of a alphabet) so that the most common symbols get the shortest code.
This 'Ultra Wide Band' pulse coding technique actually a spread sprectrum technique. Pulses have interesting spectral characteristics. They don't occupy any particular part of the spectrum, and a particular sequence of pulses is easy to pick out among noise and interference.
Re:This is cool, but... (Score:1)
Except that these standards are open and anyone can implement them. Window's isn't like that. You don't have mutiple vendors of Window's out there. You have mutiple vendors of GSM equipment- including base stations and hand sets.
For example, the GSM standard is currently under the stewardship of a hodge-podge of international organizations and standards groups, with some kind of relationship to the ITU (United Nation's Internation Telecommunications Unioin).
Re:and ham radio will lose (Score:1)
p0rn (Score:1)
Re:Free Market (Score:1)
I recently issued a purchase order for some translation services to get one of our products translated into Danish. The Purchasing Department made a mistake and accidentally purchased Denmark. What am I to do now?
-- puzzled@microsoft.com From Redmond, WA
Re:Free Market (Score:1)
What did he say? (Score:1)
Auctioning off bandwidth... (Score:2)
Who exactly is selling this bandwidth, and to who? Since this is public bandwidth, I imagine that the government will sell it off. But what is their requirments for being able to buy it? And will the buyer have to pay any rent on it? How de we know that Ted Turner won't buy the whole junk of bandwidth? And why is the government putting so much energy into finding ways for yuppies to have as many toys as they want?
So many questions...
Moving to new Standards (Score:1)
replace and old one. Look at the case of fuel everyone talk about how we should change over from fossil fuels to
natural gas. But is there no sysytem in place to take care of the demand. It is expensive to do so. In the case of HDTV
the FCC does not want to play along because they know that there is alot of work involed. Thier major concern is the
fact that they will create a standard that conflicts with others have a big mess on thier hand. So much for progress
3G (Score:1)
The US license will go for a pretty penny, however what are the penetration rates over there?
auctions are illegal...and ham radio will lose (Score:3)
I think its great for huge companies to bid themselves into bankruptcy over these new allocations. TV is a vast wasteland, and its 60 year old technology doesn't make efficient use of the bandwidth it has been allocated. But this latest revelation on the size of 3G wireless systems for bandwidth frightens me. I see ham radio being among the first victims, as it doesn't generate any revenue for the government and its lobby (the ARRL) is orders of magnitude less funded than the commercial wireless industry. Time and time again, hams have been pushed off of bands that have 'commercial value', even though hams made a lot of the technical breakthroughs that allowed those bands to be practically used. Ham Radio itself is somewhat to blame. THe numbers of licensed hams has (supposedly) been declining over the past several years. The hobby has a reputation as a haven for a bunch of crotchety old men who talk about nothing but ham radio, and collect postcards from people in small countries that they have done nothing more than exchange callsigns and reception reports from. Ham radio needs to have new blood. Many of the current ham population have pointed out that the thing that attracted them to radio was the ability to contact strange and distant lands, and that these days that role is fulfiled by the Internet. But I am one of those who believe that the community of hams and the community of Internet hobbyists (hobbyists=people who don't use the Internet solely to make or spend money) have great possibilities to merge the two worlds, to a greater extent than has been done.
Enough rambling. You should already know about GuerrillaNet [guerrilla.net].
Take the amateur radio exam and get licensed (its really not hard, and you don't have to know morse code any more)...then you can add to the ranks of licensed Amatuer Radio operators and make the FCC think twice about selling off the spectrum so we can all have sprint wristwatch TVs (that will still work like shit)
Re:This is great news! (Score:2)
Yep. [qsl.net]
Unfortunately, the other posters are probably right -- this allocation will end up being carved from the Amateur spectrum. It's hard to justify giving us so much space that most of us don't use. I'm very surprised we still have 1296 MHz, for instance.
Reinventing Government (Score:2)
They have classified nearly every low value area in the country as "earthquake" or "flood" zones, based on geography alone, rather than historical data.
Then, they sell the homes through government programs to the poor at low interest rates/no down payment. How can they afford to do that? They force you to buy earthquake or flood insurance as part of the loan.
Who provides such insurance? Guess! The Government. They decide your property is at risk, they make the loan requiring the insurance, and they provide the insurance. This type of insurance is $50 dollars or more a month, for a moderately priced home.
Bend over, America. Clintonian Democracy is about to "reinvent" government again. Not that the Shrub would be any better, or Algore.
This election sucks. Tweedle Dumb, and Tweedle Dumber. Tastes great/Less filling. An embarrassment to the planet.
Re:Make more of the spectrum we have... (Score:2)
Yeah, it's called Morse Code. Frankly I don't see how turning it into pulses serves any advantage, unless they use some sort of TDMA (Time Division Multiple Access) system where people can use the same frequency as long as they send at different times. No matter how small the pulse time, though, a certain amount of actual information has to be sent, and that can increase the number of users on a single frequency by maybe 5 or 10 at most.
Re:auctions are illegal...and ham radio will lose (Score:1)
Well, speaking as a relatively new ham (got it in 1998) I would have to say I sort of agree with the "crotchety old men" remark. Ever go to a ham radio convention like at Dayton, OH? Jesus... it's a ton of old buggers selling every piece of shit they have in their basement they could lug.
I only got involved in it for the emergency communications aspect of the service. In the event of a real catastrophe there isn't going to be any phones or Internet connections.
Re:auctions are illegal...and ham radio will lose (Score:1)
Re:This is cool, but...tou miss the point! (Score:1)
The Oval Orifice (Score:1)
Our good buddy Bill Clinton was assigned a new intern named Sally. Being the polite gentleman he is, Bill went to visit Sally and ask her if she needed any questions answered. She said no, so Bill asked, "Have you seen the presidential clock yet?"
Sally replied, "I haven't even heard of the presidential clock." Bill then replied, "Well let's go to my office, so I can show it to you."
Sally was a little taken aback, and she stated, "With all the problems you've had lately, I don't think we should."
Then Bill said, "Ahh, it's just a clock, and I promise I won't try anything." Sally then agrees to go with him. Bill leads her to the Oval Orifice, shuts and locks the door behind them and then drops his pants to the floor.
Sally is flabbergasted and says, "Mr. President, that is the presidential cock, not the presidential clock."
Bill looks at her and says, "Sally, by my definition, if you put two hands and a face on it, it's a clock."
Re:This is great news! (Score:1)
Re:the war continues (Score:1)
The DOD doesn't have lobbyists. Lobbyists are hired by political action commitees. DOD staff don't have to make campaign contributions to talk to the president.
Finally a question. When these 'bandwidth' are auctioned, how long is the 'ownership' period? If it isn't time-limited, then the bandwidth is essentially infinitely valuable and we've been screwed once again by lobbiests and the technical morons in Washington.
The purpose of the auction isn't actually a sale, its a lease. I think the duration is something like twenty years.
Amateur Radio Bands will be hit first (Score:3)
the war continues (Score:3)
Presuming many of you have been hiding under a rock, some background information is needed to consider this thing.
The big losers are apt to be DOD and the Amateur Radio community. DOD lobbiests will not have enough clout to protect the relatively vast amount of bandwidth that they have compaired with the communications lobbiests. Too bad, who needs militiary communications anyway right?
The Amateurs respond to attempts to take bandwidth on nearly a weekly basis. Usually they're successful, but in cases like the 220MHz band, the United Parcel Service [ups.com] had better lobbiests than the amateur community and 2ish MHz of bandwidth was lost. Ironically, UPS ultimately didn't use the spectrum it acquired.
So now Bill (or Hillary) gets lobbiest money to 'assist' the telecommunications industry in doing yet another land grab that makes the US treasury a little more money. If they think that March 2001 is realistic for the auction date for non-DOD bandwidth they're going to be very very wrong. It will be held up in court for years.
In the end, we've not got a telecommunications policy any more than we've got an energy policy. Both are important plans for mapping out the future. Whose fault is it? Your choice. I tend to think that fixed location systems shouldn't waste radio bandwidth that should be saved for mobile users. So much of the current initative (radio broadband) is just to get around the increasingly incompetent "last-mile" carriers.
Finally a question. When these 'bandwidth' are auctioned, how long is the 'ownership' period? If it isn't time-limited, then the bandwidth is essentially infinitely valuable and we've been screwed once again by lobbiests and the technical morons in Washington.
Multics
Re:Auctioning off bandwidth... (Score:3)
The government (well FCC) to celluar providers, Sprint, AT&T, Airtouch, Vodaphone etc.
I imagine that the government will sell it off. But what is their requirments for being able to buy it
After they auction off the bandwidth, it's no longer a public eternity, to buy it you basically need a shed load of cash (way into the billions of $), they don't have to pay rent since the license usually lasts ~ 20 years.
How de we know that Ted Turner won't buy the whole junk of bandwidth
I doubt even he would have enough cash, also I think there are restrictions so one company = one license, some of the licenses have bigger allotments of frequencies though (in the UK at least). The UK licenses went for $35 Billion in total, and the UK only has 1/4 the population of the US, so you can only guess what these auctions will generate.
And why is the government putting so much energy into finding ways for yuppies to have as many toys as they want?
The last time I saw a yuppie thinking a mobile phone was flash was in the 80's, they're hardly a status icon anymore, nearly all the kids over here (from about 11 up) have phones thanks to the pay-as-you talk packages. Some kids even have much smarter phones than me or even rich businessmen, smug little shits
Unless you can't send abusive SMS messages to yer mates mobile in the playground, you're just not hip anymore.
This is great news! (Score:1)
I ask my fellow (US) Slashdot readers to please let this continue by supporting these two fine parties in November. For more information, see Billionaires for Bush (or Gore) [billionair...orgore.com].