In this remand proceeding, critics of the RIF Order have failed to provide useful or informative insights on ensuring the needs of public safety are protected though regulation. Overall, the impression that light-touch regulation of the Internet provides the best blend of technical progress and protection of legacy Internet applications is reinforced even by critics of the current regime.
It behooves us to be realistic, to assess facts honestly, and to avoid rushing to solve non-existent problems while real needs remain unaddressed. The Internet works fine for those of us who have it, but it doesn’t work at all for the rest of us.
At least part of this problem will depend on making the necessary enhancements to the Internet architecture that will enable us to provide a kid-safe Internet experience. This may be the hardest part, actually, because it’s the only part that’s not simply a matter of money.
Silicon Valley is full of firms that are tracking our movements and recording our contacts today. This is how Google and Facebook make a living, and they’re going to keep on doing it whether their datasets and computer power are used to sell ads or to protect public health.
I’m proposing that the FCC releases 480 MHz of bandwidth in the 6 GHz band for a pilot project. The terms of the pilot are as specified, three high speed, indivisible 160 MHz channels supported by ongoing work on inter-access point coordination.
We also need to get better – a lot better – at communicating our aspirations and motives for creating new technology. 5G is an a chaotic state in many jurisdictions these days because we’ve failed to communicate the benefits and to bring the public along with us.
The inquiry will need to determine whether these deals were made for legitimate purposes (such as increasing efficiency and product quality) or for illegitimate ones, such as stifling budding competitors to better control markets. Now that the blush is off the tech rose, this is going to be an interesting inquiry.