Why Open Spectrum Matters - The End of the Broadcast Nation
David Weinberger [1]self@evident.com, www.evident.comLast updated: 1.21.03 See also: The Open Spectrum FAQThe End of the Broadcast NationWe are not in the age of Information.
We are not in the age of the Internet.We are in the Age of Connection.Being connected is at the heart of our democracy and our economy. The more and better those connections, the stronger are our government, businesses, science, culture, education…Until now, our connectedness has depended on centralized control points that have been the gatekeepers of our economic and political networks.
To speak to everyone, you had to be one of the few with access to a broadcast networks. To sell to everyone, you had to be one of the few with access to a global distribution channel.
To achieve office, you had to be one of the few with access to corporate coffers and national media.But we are on the verge of being able to connect to anyone and everyone, whenever and however we want.
Connectedness that’s always there and always on.This isn’t about getting more TV channels. Change the way we’re connected and you’ve changed everything, from the economy to governance.
This is how fundamental transformation occurs.In this context, spectrum has nothing to do with electromagnetic waves and auctions. It is far more fundamental: Spectrum is connection.We will connect.
The human drive for connection is too strong to be stopped. The market and the electorate are clamoring for this.
Consider just some of the more obvious changes:When consumers are connected, we turn off the marketing messages and tell one another the truth about what we buy.When students are connected, they teach each other and work collaboratively…even if they are still being graded as if each assignment were done alone in a cell.When citizens are connected, we put our money and our votes with politicians who join the fray.
Safe, phony words and please-everyone positions sound more hollow than ever. We want our government to recognize and reflect the values connectedness brings.When an economy is connected, goods and services move faster.
Risks are taken and investments are made. The old gatekeepers of connection find their treasure is now a commodity.
But that commodity fuels an outbreak of economic growth that will last for decades.When a society is connected, it becomes more fair. Broadcasting’s lock on the channels of communication is broken, so more voices are heard and people are better able to determine their own individual and collected fates.The Age of Connection will begin with a fundamental change in metaphors and a basic reframing of the issues.Reframing the issuesThe conversation about Open Spectrum needs to be re-framed.
We cannot afford to talk about it in terms of interference, pipes, scarcity and property any more. Those metaphors are getting in our way.Not how we can slice up the spectrum ham ... but what will bring the greatest connectedness?Not spectrum as a thing ... but as an open standard.Not who owns spectrum ... but whether we even need a handshaking "etiquette" to allow devices to communicate wirelessly.Not how many bits can be carried by a particular slice ... but how do we move information from every A to every B most efficiently?Not whether this megacorp should be allowed to own that particular station in some specific city ... but how can we turn an audience into a conversation?Not how scarce is bandwidth ... but what can we best do with the abundance?Not how can we tinker with the current policies ... but what policies would create the most freedom, wealth and value given the new technological possibilities?The old metaphors are broken.
The new metaphors will change the way we connect with one another and thus will change the world.How we got here: Technology and bad metaphorsCurrent spectrum policy is based on bad science enshrined in obsolete ways of thinking.
The basic metaphors we’ve used are just plain wrong.Pipes. The first metaphor treats spectrum as if it were a pipe.
A pipe has a measurable capacity: a predictable volume of water can flow through a municipal water trunk. Of course, this analogy makes certain assumptions, such as that water can't be compressed effectively and you can only send one stream of water through a pipe at any one time.
In the context of these assumptions, it made sense for the Federal Communications Commission to begin licensing spectrum as if it were a scarce resource under the framework established by the Communications Act of 1934.Interference.
The second metaphor thinks of the electromagnetic energy as waves that can be deformed by interference. In fact, electromagnetic waves can pass through one another without distortion.
The policies set in 1934 by the FCC prohibiting two broadcasters from using the same frequency treat interference as a law of nature rather than as a limitation of the technology of that time.Consumption.
The third metaphor thinks of wireless communications devices as consumers of bandwidth. Every time a broadcaster receives a license, the amount of available spectrum goes down.
Spectrum is not only a finite resource, it is a scarce resource, at least according to this metaphor. New technology, however, increases bandwidth with the number of users.Property.
The first three metaphors lead to a fourth. As a pipeline to an audience, a licensed slice of spectrum has had tremendous value.
Because same-frequency waves would interfere with one another, the broadcaster had to be given exclusive access rights. Spectrum thus took on the practical characteristics of property: something of value to which someone, by legal right, has exclusive access.Three advances past the old metaphorsThese metaphors are misleading and outdated, reflecting the state of technology over 70 years ago.
They came before information theory, the Internet, and Hedy Lamarr made obsolete any policy based on interference and scarcity as if they were laws of nature.1. Spread spectrum.