Excited Delirium

Stories about Excited Delirium, the Shock Economy and a little fiction here and there.

Category Archives: net neutrality

Net Neutrality: TV Broadcasters Oppose Whitespace Program

In the US, TV broadcasters have officially filed their opposition to any plan to leverage available ‘white space’, or unused broadband wireless airwaves for public use.  They argue that transmitting wireless broadband on white spaces could interfere with TV signals.

Original story here.

I’m not an expert in this field, but the claim that airwaves will interfere with broadcasters doesn’t make a lot of sense.  For years, the strategy of cable suppliers has been to hook the cable into homes, creating a network that only they can control.

Now, with public white space, they’re claiming interference, but what would transmissions interfere with if all cable and ‘broadcast’ stations are deliverd through broadcast?

Anyways, that’s a tangent that will probably get me hung up on details that I’m under-informed on.

Instead, what struck me when reading this article is the idea that we should be looking into a similar program here in Canada, but the core consideration being a publicly-run and owned transmission network for broadband that would rival Bell and Rogers.

For a while, I’ve been preaching that the official mandate of the CBC should be expanded to make the Internet a social and public asset so that we don’t face issues like throttling and if we get our act together and elect the right government, maybe we’ll be able to do this.  Don’t expect any miracles with the current government, though ;)

Secret Plans to Sell Canada Post?

In this report, the journalist is suggesting that there are secret plans to sell of Canada Post.

I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s the first of many things to go, based on the viewpoints of the bully that we have in charge now.

I have a suggestion: instead of selling it, add it to the mix of the revised communications mandate for all Canadians. Through Canada Post, you would be able to create your own secure and private email address that does not rely on an outside commercial service.

It’s mail for the 80s! Add to that the ability to buy your own domain and host it through Canada Post, much like you would get a mailing address when you buy a house or rent an apartment.

What are your thoughts, Canada?

Net Neutrality, the Wireless Auction & The Future of Canada’s Internet

I’ve been toying with a couple of ideas related to net neutrality in Canada and I’ve developed a few that I’d like you to provide feedback on.

Basically, the background info is this:

  • Net neutrality will never exist in Canada because the ‘pipe’ is owned by Bell Canada, Rogers, Telus, etc
  • The recent wireless spectrum auction generated $4.25 billion for the people of Canada
  • The CBC is facing increased competition from companies that will have questionable Canadian ownership because of private equity deals and institutional owners

What I propose is that the official mandate of the CBC be expanded to include basic Internet services. We should be aggressive with this goal and go so far as to suggest that any Canadian should be able to get unfettered access to DSL services whenever they want without the expectation of being limited in the sites or locations that they can visit (obvious exclusions exist, including porn, gambling, etc).

The CBC has been very innovative with the delivery of some of its content, but its mandate of sharing this content with Canadians is repeatedly threatened by Canada’s telecom giants by throttling and other restrictions placed on services like BitTorrent and other P2P programs.

It’s this threat that necessitates an alternative.

The $4.25 billion generated from the wireless auction should be used to finance this pursuit. It would have two angles:

1. Develop of a ‘pipe’ to accommodate the CBC internet access.
2. Support of Canadian-made online media

With the first item, building a pipe on to the existing one (which is mostly owned and developed by Bell Canada and a number of other private ISPs) would be very impractical because you’d wind up paying more in access fees and ‘renting’ the existing infrastructure.

So … here’s a crazy idea: we contract with power utilities (most of which are publicly owned) and deliver DSL through them. Haven’t heard of Power Line Communications (PLC)? Here’s a little article with Wikipedia to whet your whistle:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_line_communication

Once the DSL problem is solved, any Canadian would be able to set up an account, access the Internet, without threat of speed reduction or other limitations.

Following that, the goal would be to foster and encourage Canadian content. This is easy: there are thousands of blogs, ezines and other sites out there that have never received funding but should. The only caveat: any publication, company or organization that has received Federal funding either from Heritage Canada or the CRTC for TV or print (or even online) is not eligible for new funding.

Obviously, such a program would never come to fruition if the Harper government is in charge, but maybe if we support someone that’s bold enough to pursue this initiative and spend money on Canada rather than tax breaks for non-Canadian companies, we’d all be much better off.

What are your thoughts?

Excited Delirium Book: Chapter 39 (OMNINet: Efforts With the FCC)

Author’s Note: The following is Chapter 39 of the my online book "Excited Delirium". Please post comments. Please tell your friends about this story. If you’ve missed a chapter, please click here for Chapter 1 (Prelude) or here for the full index .

Getting laws passed in the United States that are in your favour is easy. All you have to do is support a non-descript bill that won’t really get a lot of attention and have a friendly Senator tack on an amendment that represents your needs.

The real work is going to all the dinners, dances and other social affairs that take place nightly around Capitol Hill. Political funding today shows it head with donations to specific charities and research groups in the names of certain Senators and Congressmen or elaborate business trips and guest speaking tours in exotic locales, all funded by the organization that ‘wants change’. Continue reading →

2012: The Year the Internet Ends

I thought this video was timely with respect to Net Neutrality.

What was more interesting is that Alex Jones specifically mentions Bell Canada.

Way to go Gord!

Traffic Throttling Bell Canada Opens Online Video Store

Bell has made efforts to reassure Canadians that their throttling strategy is in no way linked to any other business strategies.

Their goal is to take the high road and reduce the volume of spammers, P2P thieves and so on.

This article takes issue with that perspective and offers a different angle on Bell’s general strategy.

“Analysts” that shouldn’t be trusted

Original NYT Story Here.

Additional Story Here.

The New York Times has caught up to the rest of the planet by exposing the level of deceit that Americans are subject to on a daily basis. This time, it turns out that they’ve exposed a wide array of ‘analysts’ that were paid off by the Pentagon to make statements in favour of military actions in the Middle East and elsewhere.

… But even uglier, if that is possible, is the revelation that these corrupted military analysts were personally involved in helping companies win military contracts. Several of these ‘honorable’ soldiers held senior positions with contractors that gave them direct responsibility for winning new Pentagon business. Others held board positions with military firms and had responsibilities involving government business, while several of the ‘analysts’ were defense industry lobbyists.

Stories like this make you wonder just how much of the information delivered by mainstream media is legit.

Stories like this also help confirm my staunch support for Net Neutrality becuase it reminds us all that without a reasonable dialogue between reasonable, unbiased people, we aren’t living in a democracy.

The History Channel & “Red Dawn”

I go to the gym every Saturday to work and always look forward to a good crappy movie on one of the new machines they have that have TV screens (they’re really cool!).

I get on and set up my routine and then start browsing the channels for something that’ll help me pass through my work out on the elliptical trainer.

I came across the History Channel and I recognized the movie instantly, despite missing the first few minutes. The panicked and erratic driving of Patrick Swayze in his pickup truck bringing a small group of kids (Charlie Sheen, C. Thomas Howell, etc) into the mountains to avoid getting caught by a battaliion of Cuban paratroopers that had just landed in Texas as part of an invasion and onslaught of WWIII.

I was enjoying the fun little flashback to my youth where me and my buddies had seen this flick half a dozen times, and then I flashed forward to the present and reminded myself that this is the biggest pile of propaganda bullshit that could ever inhabit the planet. Goebbels would be proud.

The context, the scenario, the series of events are all fictional and all manufactured to inspire a generation of Americans (and Canadians) to hate and despise the Russians and to bring the Cubans into the mix.

And that would all be fine, but then I thought “WTF does this have to do with History?” It didn’t happen. The Wolverines didn’t lead a rebellion against the occupation of America. There was no WWIII.

So why is it part of the History Channel’s regular roster of movies to play?

The last thought (and a mildly serious one): this is why we’ve got to oppose any kind of net filtering and do everything we can to ensure that no one tells us what qualifies as “history” and what does not. If that does happen, it’s painfully obvious to me that we’re going to be buried with that kind of propaganda with all other “unfiltered” channels and have our options limited when it comes to understanding what the situation actually looked like.

Link with Net Neutrality? Mukasey Says Piracy is Funding Terror

All you downloaders and file sharers: are you terrorists?

You might be, if you listen to US Attorney General Michael Mukasey, who recently stated that terrorists are generating huge profits from online piracy and counterfitting.

Full Article Here.

I like this quote from SFGate:

Before Friday’s speech, Mukasey met privately with representatives from companies including Apple Inc. and Adobe Systems Inc.

A day earlier, the attorney general also met with entertainment industry executives in Los Angeles during his three-day California trip.

I find it interesting that someone like Mukasey, with influence from the entertainment industry, is defining who’s a terrorist.

Is this yet another link that will be made in the case against folks that want to share information online, even it it’s free or part of a creative commons? Will this kind of rhetoric be used as the foundation to dump teens and grannies alike in jail because they’ve downloaded a copy of (insert new, favourite band here) latest tunes?