California's "surprisingly low" ranking for broadband connectivity speed

California may be widely considered the U.S. information technology leader as the home of the famed Silicon Valley. But when it comes to broadband Internet connectivity, it doesn't even make the top 10 among states, according to Internetnews.com's report on a recent study by mammoth Web server farmer Akamai.

David Belson, Akamai's director of market intelligence, told InternetNews.com that California ranks 17th, with just 21 percent of its connections coming in at 5 Mbps or higher over Akamai's network. "It was surprising that California didn't rank higher on the high broadband list," Belson said.

The top states are Delaware with 60 percent of its connections to Akamai measured at 5 Mbps, Rhode Island (42 percent) New York (36 percent), Nevada (34 percent), Oklahoma (33 percent), Connecticut (32 percent), New Hampshire (30 percent), Massachusetts (29 percent), Maryland (27 percent) and the District of Columbia (27 percent).

A possible contributing factor is the mediocre, incomplete state of the Golden State's broadband infrastructure. In January, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's Broadband Task Force reported California's broadband infrastructure is unevenly deployed with nearly 2,000 towns and communities lacking broadband access -- many in Northern California -- while other parts of the state, mostly in metro areas of Southern California, enjoy state of the art connections.

What's truly surprising isn't so much Akamai's findings but AT&T's dubious assertion in a recent California Public Utilities filing that it provides broadband to its entire service area in the state.

Offline outside of Olympia

According to the Everett, Washington HeraldNet, much of Washington state outside of its urban centers is still offline when it comes to broadband Internet access. The newspaper reports the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission is expected to release a study next month of the disparities in broadband use and availability in Columbia, Ferry, Grays Harbor, Lewis and Stevens counties in response to a legislative mandate to fill in the black spots.

Verizon introduces 3Mbs DSL in Western Masschusetts digital ghetto

Western Massachusetts, which the Boston Globe last July described as a "new kind of ghetto" confined to dial up and satellite Internet access, is finally entering the modern age of telecommunications.

Nearly two dozen communities are set to get by summer what's increasingly being viewed as basic broadband service: 3Mbs downloads delivered by Verizon DSL, the telco announced May 1.

Verizon said the DSL deployment would reach two-thirds of the 31 western Massachusetts communities identified by the state as having no broadband services. (What about the other one third, the residents of those areas must surely be asking) Verizon added the rollout is in line with Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick's initiative to bring more broadband to unserved and underserved communities in Massachusetts.

"The governor and western Massachusetts legislative delegation have put the proper focus on the real need for broadband expansion in the region, and we want to do everything we can to address that need," said Donna Cupelo, Verizon region president for Massachusetts and Rhode Island. We look forward to working with our government leaders to explore ways to bring broadband to other areas that are in need in Massachusetts."

This blogger will be watching closely to see if the Verizon's bigger counterpart, AT&T, will make similar efforts to shrink its own sprawling broadband back holes in its 22 state service area.

Another think tank report calls for U.S. broadband policy leadership

America has an incomplete telecommunications infrastructure that frequently fails to provide broadband over much of its "last mile" and places the U.S. behind many other industrialized nations measured on broadband access and cost. The problem persists because of private market failure, lack of government leadership and proactive policies and ideological gridlock, concludes a report released this week.

Like other think tanks that warn the U.S. is at a crisis point for broadband, the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation calls for a strong, effective national broadband policy, arguing that broadband is too critical to the economic well being of the nation to be left solely to market forces. Both public policymakers and private sector providers play a key leadership role, the report asserts, as occurs in other nations with greater broadband access at lower cost:

We should be able to agree that the United States can do better on broadband. The most important step the United States can take as a nation to improve our broadband performance may be to move beyond the divisive and unproductive debate over broadband policy that revolves around arguments about whether we are behind or ahead; whether our relative position is due to policy or other factors; whether unbundling is a magic bullet or an investment killer; and of course, whether net neutrality is the greatest threat to the Internet since its inception or something that is an anachronistic concept.

It’s time to reject the view that somehow this is a zero-sum game between corporate America and government. Both must clearly play a leadership role if we are to make headway on broadband performance. This means shifting the debate to focus on the key issues: how to enact public policies that emphasize the primary goal— getting as many American households as possible using high-speed broadband networks to engage in all sorts of online activities, including education, health care, work, commerce, and interacting with their government.

To give broadband providers the economic incentives to invest in broadband infrastructure, the report offers these specific recommendations:

1. More favorable tax policies to encourage investment in broadband networks, such as accelerated depreciation and exempting broadband services from federal, state, and local taxation.

2. Continue to make more spectrum, including “white spaces,” available for next-generation wireless data networks.

3. Expand the Department of Agriculture’s Rural Utilities Service Broadband Program and target the program to places that currently do not have non-satellite broadband available.

4. Reform the federal Universal Service Fund program to extend support for rural broadband to all carriers, and consider providing the funding through a reverse auction mechanism.

5. Fund a national program to co-fund state-level broadband support programs, such as Connect Kentucky or North Carolina e-NC Authority.

6. Promote the widespread use of a national, user-generated, Internet-based broadband mapping system that would track location, speed, and price of broadband.

7. State and local governments should take action to make it easier for providers to deploy broadband services, including making it easier to access rights-of-way.

8. Support initiatives around the nation to encourage broadband usage and digital literacy.

9. Fund a revitalized Technology Opportunities Program, with a particular focus on the development of nationally scalable Web-based projects that address particular social needs, including law enforcement, health care, education, and access for persons with disabilities.

10. Exempt broadband Internet access from federal, state, and local taxes.

11. Support new applications, including putting more public content online, improving e-government, and supporting telework, telemedicine, and online learning programs.

For some mired in AT&T broadband black holes, U-Verse could bring long awaited high speed Internet

For some residential and small business customers currently outside the reach of AT&T's underpowered DSL service, there could be an unexpected benefit with the rollout of AT&T's triple play U-Verse advanced service offering. If they are served by central office switches where U-Verse is being deployed, the odds are likely higher they will finally get wireline-based broadband.

Last October, Ralph de la Vega, AT&T's group president, regional telecommunications and entertainment, told Investor's Business Daily the telco plans to phase out its its existing voice network and replace it with a VOIP (Voice Over Internet Protocol) system where U-Verse is being deployed. In other words, swapping out existing legacy voice-based telephone central office (CO) switching equipment with what are essentially souped up Internet servers capable of delivering multiple Internet Protocol-based advanced services including Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP), video, and of course high speed Internet access. That's U-Verse.

Since AT&T like other telcos is rapidly losing residential wireline subscribers who are migrating to wireless voice, it could opt to speed up U-Verse deployments since it would allow the company to sell more than just Plain Old Telephone Service (POTs). That would provide revenues to replace lost residential customers as well as gain additional revenues justifying a ramped up rollout. U-Verse not only gives AT&T the opportunity to replace lost residential voice lines, but also to finance upgrades to its copper cable plant so it can reliably provide U-Verse services, which are delivered by VDSL-based remote VRAD terminals fed with fiber optic connections.

An added incentive for AT&T in some of these areas would be the absence of existing competition from cable companies, which would invariably increase the take rate for U-Verse since these broadband-deprived prospective customers are likely to jump at the chance to get off dialup and satellite.

Cable providers face increased local government demands to renegotiate franchises for universal access

As cable providers go head to head with telcos to be full service advanced telecommunications players offering video, Internet and VOIP they will increasingly come under pressure from local governments to renegotiate franchise agreements to provide universal coverage. Their constituents no longer see cable as a luxury entertainment service but rather as vital telecommunications infrastructure.

A case in point is detailed in this dispatch from the Shelburne Falls (Massachusetts) Independent.

White paper: Telework constrained by inadequate broadband access, slow speeds

To coincide with Earth Day 2008 as gasoline prices reach new highs on record oil prices, the American Electronics Association (AeA) issued a white paper April 22 encouraging greater adoption of telework, also known as telecommuting.

Notably, the white paper cites the lack of broadband Internet access as a key obstacle to allow information workers to work from their homes at least some of the time rather than commuting to an office.

For widespread adoption of telework,the United States needs ubiquitous broadband Internet access. Much of the potential for enlarging the workforce through telework is by attracting people from rural or isolated areas -- or those who would like to relocate to such places. Yet these are the areas least likely to have broadband access. Additionally, the speed of broadband in many parts of the country is woefully insufficient to support the collaborative applications needed for efficient telework.

Broadband cooperative forming in northern Michigan

A broadband cooperative is forming in northern Michigan to provide residents and businesses in 12 counties with more and better options than dialup and satellite access.

According to the Peteskoy (Mich.) News-Review, organizers including the Northern Lakes Economic Alliance and Northeast Michigan Council of Governments are looking into rural development loans from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to fund broadband infrastructure.

History is repeating itself. A century ago, telephone co-ops were created to provide service to areas without it. Provided they can raise sufficient funding, these modern day telecommunications co-ops like the Northern Michigan Broadband Cooperative may prove successful because they cover large geographical areas and thus can leverage economies of scale to their advantage.

More typical and problematic are the numerous scattered broadband black holes that characterize America's incomplete telecommunications infrastructure. They encompass much smaller geographical areas and make it difficult for residents and businesses to take collective action like in northern Michigan. The Communications Workers of America has aptly termed this swiss cheese, crazy quilt telecom infrastructure a "hodge podge" that can result in some folks having state of the art advanced telecommunications services while others just down the road or on the next street are stuck in 1992 and limited to dialup access.

Verizon Wireless picks off more AT&T residential customers in Northern California

There are more indications Verizon Wireless is moving into AT&T's service area with its 3G wireless broadband service offering, snapping up fixed location broadband subscribers that AT&T has neglected to serve with wireline-based broadband Internet access.

The North Bay Business Journal reports Verizon has expanded its wireless broadband service area up the Highway 101 corridor from Santa Rosa to Cloverdale, and out to coastal Sea Ranch. That's in addition to Clearlake, Lakeport and Middletown in Lake County, and Ukiah, Willits, Laytonville, Fort Bragg and Hopland in Mendocino County, encompassing large areas long lacking high speed Internet access.

While Verizon Wireless is primarily targeting mobile customers, it's finding a market in fixed AT&T residential and small business customers who have suffered years of digital deprivation in AT&T's sprawling broadband black holes.

Verizon offers speeds of 600 Kbs to 1.4 Mbs for downloads 500 to 800 Kbs on the uplink. That's arguably not broadband class throughput even at the high end of the range (most connections are likely to come in at half the advertised maximums), but a considerably better option than AT&T's ancient dialup or sluggish, costly satellite Internet.

From a competitive standpoint, this is bad news for AT&T. By offering a quasi-broadband service for residential subscribers situated in the many broadband black holes in AT&T's wire line service area, Verizon is likely to also build brand name loyalty and steal away wireless voice subscribers who might otherwise sign up with AT&T.

Governor sends message to Connect Kentucky, vetoes increased funding

In January, Art Brodsky of Public Knowledge released a critique of Connect Kentucky calling into question its claim that more than 90 percent of the Bluegrass State has access broadband Internet access thanks to its efforts.

Brodsky now reports Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear declined to approve $2.4 million in additional grant funding for the telco-backed nonprofit, citing the state's tight finances.

Beshear's veto message clearly indicates the governor's skepticism that the additional money will provide any real benefit for Kentucky residents. Perhaps Beshear like me isn't interested in more stalling, paper chase exercises such as mapping broadband availability and creating inflated, self serving statistics and would rather see real, tangible broadband infrastructure being built in order to provide broadband to those without it.

Verizon Wireless harvests AT&T residential customers stuck in broadband black holes

While big telcos AT&T and Verizon don’t compete on wireline-based broadband services and stay out of each other’s service areas, that anti-competitive strategy does not apply to wireless broadband.

In Northern California, for example, Verizon has expanded its wireless broadband footprint and AT&T announced this week it would counter with a $290 million expansion of its wireless system in Northern California and Reno, Nevada. Both are based on Third Generation (3G) wireless technology and are primarily targeted to mobile wireless customers rather than fixed residential users.

But some residential customers mired in AT&T’s large broadband black holes created by its incomplete wireline infrastructure are turning to Verizon’s wireless broadband plans offering advertised speeds of 600 Kbps to 1.4 Mbps for downloads and 500 Kbps to 800 Kbps for uploads. For them, it’s an easy choice over impractical early 1990s era dial up or substandard and costly satellite service.

AT&T isn’t likely to offer a superior alternative in terms of speed and usage caps (Verizon offers a 50Mb per month plan for $40 and a 5Gb plan for $50 with overage charges for exceeding the limit). Plus Verizon Wireless requires two-year contracts, which would dissuade subscribers from switching to AT&T.

If AT&T wants to protect its residential customers who don’t have wireline-based broadband from signing up with Verizon Wireless or convince them paying an early termination fee is worthwhile, it will have to do what it should have done years ago and expedite an upgrade and expansion of its wireline infrastructure to offer what the California Public Utilities Commission deems as true broadband providing minimum speeds of 3Mbs for downloads and 1Mbs uploads.

If on the other hand AT&T merely matches with a service at or slightly less comparable to Verizon Wireless Broadband without leveraging its wireline infrastructure to more widely offer true broadband service, it will once again be a day late and dollar short and leave unearned revenues on the table.

AT&T, cablecos poised to close Tennessee franchise deal that will leave gaping broadband black holes

AT&T and the cable companies are about to screw over much of Tennessee that has been waiting to come into the modern telecommunications age and obtain broadband Internet access.

They are set to announce a deal today in which the cable industry will drop its opposition to legislation that would preempt local government regulatory authority over Internet-protocol based TV (IPTV) service AT&T wants to offer in selected areas of the state. The same thing happened in California in 2006, leaving about 2,000 communities still without broadband access according to a report by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's Broadband Task Force issued in late January.

Tennessee's cable companies, which earlier this year criticized AT&T's initiative because it provided for only limited infrastructure build out requirements that would leave large areas mired in broadband black holes, have reportedly dropped their opposition.
The Tennessean reports today that under draft legislation that was still being negotiated over the weekend, AT&T would have to cover just 30 percent of its territory within 3½ years after it begins offering IPTV, citing sources involved in negotiations.

According to the report, the draft legislation would apply credit toward AT&T's minimal build out requirement if it offers DSL service of at least 1.5mbs to homes that don't now have access to broadband. It's a meaningless provision. Even if enacted, AT&T is likely to ignore it since it has effectively halted new DSL deployments and is concentrating exclusively on its IPTV-based U-Verse offering. Those without broadband will simply be left twisting in the wind. Why would AT&T need the credit anyway with with legislation's already minimal buildout benchmark?

Bottom line is neither AT&T nor the cable companies have lost any skin in the deal and have sacrificed Tennesseans instead by relegating them to dial up and satellite Internet access. That leaves it to Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen to look out for the interests of his constituents as he indicated he would do in early February. Rather than endorse this lousy deal for consumers like Schwarzenegger did in California two years ago, he should reject it.

America needs broadband czar, tech-oriented FCC to solve last mile problem

Slate.com's Tim Wu says that while technology has advanced rapidly in the last several years, the so-called "last mile" telecommunications infrastructure connecting Americans to the Internet has not. He's dead on -- and regrettably -- correct.

Wu's solution for the next administration that takes office in January 2009? Appoint a broadband czar reporting to the president. "Right now, broadband is no one's responsibility, and the buck keeps getting passed between industry, Congress, the White House, and the FCC," Wu writes. "The point of a czar would be to make it someone's job to figure out what it will take to fix broadband."

Wu also advocates revamping the Federal Communications Commission to remake it from its current political and lobbying based culture that tends to support the nation's mediocre broadband status quo to a technology-driven "dream team" agency run by the "wisest tech experts and visionaries."

Read this and Wu's other recommendations for the incoming administration by clicking here.

Survey: All should have broadband access without regard to location

Americans should have access to broadband regardless of where they live, according to 80 percent of 451 readers of leading U.S. telecom publications in a survey commissioned by telecommunications network vendor Tellabs.

Respondents strongly support expanding broadband availability in the United States, especially in under-served rural areas. The lack of broadband availability, whether due to geographic or economic reasons, hurts productivity, according to nearly 90 percent of survey respondents. Eighty percent believe the U.S. should use at least some of the current Universal Service Fund to expand rural broadband.

FCC broadband data for first half of 2007 show nation plagued by persistent telco broadband black holes

The Federal Communications Commission's semi-annual report on broadband deployment as required by the Telecommunications Act of 1996 covering the first half of 2007 is out and the numbers aren't good. (See Table 14) They show virtually no improvement in the percentage of residences that can get high speed Internet from their telcos during the first half of 2007 compared to all of 2006.

On average, nearly 20 percent of Americans still are unable to get broadband from their incumbent telephone companies. In some states -- notably Vermont, Virginia, New Hampshire and Maine -- the number is even worse, with fully one third of state households cut off from the modern era of telecommunications. No state exceeds the 91 percent availability rate of Georgia, though Nevada and California come close with 90 percent and 89 percent, respectively.

Kentucky's figure of 87 percent also casts doubt on the claim of Connect Kentucky in an Aug. 9, 2007 news release that 94 percent of households in the Blue Grass State can get broadband and no households will be left in digital darkness by the end of 2007. The organization was the subject of a January expose by Public Knowledge's Art Brodsky, who debunked its overblown broadband access claims.

Support building for California legislation allowing local governments to construct broadband infrastructure

Political support appears to be building for legislation that would authorize community service districts, a form of California local government, to construct broadband infrastructure.

Humboldt County Supervisor Supervisor Roger Rodoni is asking the county's supes to write a legislative committee in support of the legislation, according to The Eureka Reporter.

“With passage of this bill, Humboldt County would have opportunities to bring in multiple broadband services and help to prevent the gridlock we’ve had in the recent past because of our limited broadband service,” Rodoni was quoted as saying.

Lawmakers should broaden the scope of the legislation, SB 1191, to include all forms of local government in California considering a January 2008 report by report by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's Broadband Task Force finding nearly 2,000 California communities lack high speed Internet access.

Telco regulators should prohibit passive "soft" divestiture and require companies to upgrade or sell off assets

The two major telcos in the United States, AT&T and Verizon, have segmented their residential wire line markets into three groups.

The first segment is where the telcos are deploying their state-of-the-art infrastructure. For AT&T, it’s the company’s hybrid fiber-copper based VDSL “Project Lightspeed” rollout in support of its Internet/Video/Voice “triple play” U-Verse product bundle. For Verizon, it’s the telco’s FiOS fiber to the premises infrastructure that like U-Verse offers the triple play bundle but with far greater bandwidth and expansion capacity. This “prime” segment comprises only a small percentage of each company’s total residential lines.

The second residential wire line segment features “double play” offerings of broadband Internet and traditional analog POTS (plain old telephone service) delivered over copper cable infrastructure. Broadband is provided by legacy ADSL central office DSLAMs and remote terminals. This “preferred” segment comprises the bulk of the two telcos’ residential customer base.

Which brings us to the third and last market segment. Call it the “non preferred” orphan segment. It is in the words of one independent ISP being kept on life support, serviced only when necessary by makeshift “bubble gum and bailing wire” repairs. Traditional voice service can be spotty, particularly when it rains and afterwards when the sun expands and dries aging aerial cables. Broadband Internet access is nonexistent and residential customers are stuck using early 1990s era dial up technology. In many cases, DSL remote terminals have been installed but were never activated and are now considered obsolete, destined never to be “turned up” in telco parlance. While comprising about 20 percent of the telcos’ residential subscriber base, this third segment accounts for the bulk of repair costs and generates the most complaints to regulators.

This segment has been divested by the telcos, either actively or passively. An example of active divestiture is Verizon’s sale of large portions of its residential territory in several New England states including Maine and Vermont. AT&T, by contrast, has chosen the route of passive or "soft" divestiture. AT&T doesn’t want to service its tertiary residential market segment or upgrade the infrastructure within it in order to offer more services, but the company hasn’t made any efforts to spin off portions of it either. Consequently, the millions of unfortunate residents of this market segment are stuck in telecommunications limbo land where time stands still and the calendar still reads 1991.

Since these companies typically hold monopolistic positions in their third and least desired segments, regulators should prohibit the neglectful passive divestiture practiced most prominently by AT&T and give the telcos a choice: bring your services up to modern standards or sell and get out and make way for other providers who can offer better services.

Mapmaking a diversion on the road to full broadband deployment

One of the biggest diversions to filling in America’s many persistent broadband black holes is the idea of geographically mapping broadband availability. It’s been a prominent activity of telco industry backed nonprofits and broadband task forces and working groups established by state governments with the goal of increasing broadband access. Those mapmaking efforts have in turn influenced some in Congress to propose mapping the entire nation.

Unfortunately, too many well intended policymakers and broadband advocates have fallen into the misguided notion that in order increase broadband access, it must first be known where the broadband black holes are.

But rather than speeding broadband deployment, the mapping proposals have slowed it by creating an unnecessary way station on the road to full broadband deployment. They’ve produced disputes among telcos and cable companies who believe the maps will reveal their deployment strategies to competitors. (Not true, but that’s beside the point) Then there are debates among the providers and the mapmakers over the degree of granularity. Should the maps be drawn based on five-digit ZIP Codes, ZIP plus 4 or census tracts?

These mapping exercises are essentially busy work that distracts from the real task at hand: the need to deploy broadband infrastructure to eliminate those areas lacking it as rapidly as possible. Plus they give the telcos and cable companies an excuse to avoid further deployments until the scope of the maps is agreed upon and the maps are drawn up. When they’re completed, we end up with some nice pretty maps to look at but new no actual broadband deployment. Cynics might understandably suggest that’s a stall tactic on the part of the providers.

The maps also create a platform from which the providers can mount more empty promises of broadband deployment like AT&T's bogus Project Pronto. I recall attending a community meeting with AT&T’s predecessor entity SBC Communications in 2002 at which the telco displayed a large wall map showing a goal of broadband deployment to nearly 100 percent of its service areas by 2006. Here it is 2008 and Project Pronto turned out to be Project Punt.

The telcos and cable companies know where they've deployed broadband infrastructure. Public policymakers typically do not. Since local elected officials already represent a given geographical area, it’s very easy for them to poll their constituents on their Web sites, by mail and town hall meetings to ask them if they have broadband. Those living in broadband black holes will give them an earful. No mapping required.

U.S. broadband forecasts sweep pathetic state of access under the rug

A couple of reports are out this week that would lead their readers to believe that U.S. broadband access and speeds are “exploding” as one tech press account put it. Or about to.

Don’t believe it. It’s essentially telco/cable duopoly propaganda designed to make the number of people who have access to advanced services appear to be large and growing fast. The apparent goal is to sweep under the rug the ugly reality that very large numbers of Americans are still accessing the Internet the same way they did when a young former Arkansas governor named Bill Clinton was assuming the presidency and are likely to do so for some time. Only now, some have option of using satellite, a crippled and costly alternative that’s not much better than dialup and doesn’t provide true broadband connectivity.

One of these reports was issued this week by research firm Parks Associates. It projects by 2012, close to 33 million U.S. households will have broadband services with speeds of 10 Mbps or higher, capable of streaming high-definition video. The U.S. Census Bureau projects there will be about 177 million households by 2012, meaning many folks won’t. “If high-bandwidth broadband services fail to reach mass-market consumers, the United States may lose its competitive edge in the next round of technology innovation,” the report warns. "Such a scenario would be unpleasant.” Based on these numbers, it appears the U.S. is in for a lot of broadband unpleasantness.

Also this week, another research outfit projected that by 2011, of those who can get service at this speed, more than 9 million U.S. households will subscribe to telco-provided Internet Protocol TV service. The Yankee Group’s report, From Gorillas to Guerrillas, IPTV Changes Everything, sharply departs from reality in suggesting that IPTV technology will change the stodgy, accounting and lobbying driven Bell System culture that still rules telcos.

“IPTV will also forever transform how telcos operate,” Yankee Group declares in a bout of apparent wishful thinking. “It will take the service providers from being highly centralized, giant corporations to become decentralized, flexible entities that can respond much more rapidly to the specific needs of the communities they serve. The phone company of the past—the 800-pound gorilla—is dead. IPTV will transform telcos from the market-dominating gorillas they once were, to street fighting guerrillas."

That assessment is so out of touch it’s laughable. The telcos and especially the dominant player, AT&T, behave like arrogant, aloof government bureaucracies, not unlike the old Soviet phone company where customers had to wait five years just to get phone service. Consider the many folks who are stuck with POTS-based dial up that AT&T has been telling for years "We'll get to you when we get to you" and "Maybe and that's final" when they've asked (and often begged) for advanced services. They don't even have DSL let alone IPTV and aren't likely to see the latter for many more years — all the while relegated to early 1990s era dialup and satellite. And forget about the myth this problem is confined to rural areas; there are plenty of folks within metro areas who are still on dialup.

To suggest the entrenched, centralized, top-down telco culture can change in just two years' time to a "guerrilla marketing" culture simply defies common sense. It will likely take at least a decade and likely far longer. Only a major external event like another government ordered divestiture would likely alter that timetable.

Broadband black holes in Brooklyn?

Surprisingly so, according to this item on the New York City Broadband Advisory Committee appearing today in the Queens Chronicle:

The committee working to bring high speed public Internet access to New York City will be holding a hearing in Queens on Monday, March 3 at 1 p.m. The New York City Broadband Advisory Committee will convene at LaGuardia Community College in Long Island City. The public is invited to attend and testify.

The committee, headed by Councilwoman Gale Brewer from Manhattan and including Councilman James Sanders from Springfield Gardens, will hear testimony from local officials and Queens residents about the accessibility and affordability of high speed Internet in Queens.

The committee has held hearings in Manhattan, the Bronx and Brooklyn already and was surprised to learn that some areas of Brooklyn have no cable or Internet access, according to Brewer. Sanders speculates that the same situation probably exists in parts of Queens.