Join 3,557 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Chairman Martin Unleashed and Unlicensed
October 18, 2008 12:34 AM   Subscribe

FCC paves way for free use of vacant airwaves -- white space -- available in February as TV spectrum is cleared up by digital conversion. Apparently another vote for change will take place November 4. The FCC btw also recently backed a free (ad-supported) nationwide wireless broadband plan in another hunk of spectrum to be auctioned off in 2009.
posted by kliuless (19 comments total) 6 users marked this as a favorite

 
The Federal Communications Commission has declared victory after the release of an engineering study on whether its proposed free and smut-free broadband service will harm mobile phone use in other bands.

Clearly the reason it doesn't harm mobile phone use is because, as a theoretical internet connection with all the smut filtered off, it cannot actually exist.
posted by Mitrovarr at 1:36 AM on October 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


I don't get how this will work. Are they going to ban https and vpns? You can't ban porn unless you ban encryption as well. But then you lose secure email, online banking, shopping, etc.

There seems to be a pretty direct tradeoff between privacy and content filtering. And I don't want to use a public wireless network without privacy and encryption.

I propose we call it "Chinese Wireless".
posted by ryanrs at 2:04 AM on October 18, 2008 [6 favorites]


From M2Z Networks' FAQ:
Q: How does the family-friendly indecency filter work? Who can turn off the filter?

A: M2Z's filter will operate at the network level and block sites based on their domain names -- similar to what many schools and public libraries provide to protect children. It is a superior solution to software based systems that require parents to act as IT administrators and are also easy to manipulate and circumvent. People who subscribe to the premium service will establish their age and identity and therefore, can turn off the filter if they wish.
Stupid and useless. At least it will be easy to bypass.
posted by ryanrs at 2:23 AM on October 18, 2008


Plus how the hell do they think it's going to be "ad supported"? Does the FCC actually believe the licensee could make money as if it were a broadcast medium, without charging for 'premium' access?Not really any other options, besides having the Department of Homeland Security operate an especially inept version of the BBC's TV License Enforcement patrols.
posted by blasdelf at 2:39 AM on October 18, 2008


Careful, blasdelf—ineptness is one of their core competencies.
posted by ryanrs at 2:51 AM on October 18, 2008 [4 favorites]


If they insert ads, aren't they distributing a derivative work for commercial gain? Sounds like copyright infringement.
posted by ryanrs at 3:02 AM on October 18, 2008


…block sites based on their domain names

Sounds like you'd just have to use a non-fucked public DNS server (like Verizon's 4.2.2.4). They could try to block/reroute all other DNS traffic, but they probably wouldn't bother since you could just tunnel/proxy anyway.
posted by blasdelf at 3:04 AM on October 18, 2008


DHS has other competencies?

Free dial-up ISPs got away with ad insertion of various sorts when they were popular, usually framesets, sometimes embedded in the browser chrome instead of technically being in the document. I'm not sure if any of them ever served up ads contextually to suit the page content — you better believe they'd do that this time around.
posted by blasdelf at 3:09 AM on October 18, 2008


I'm all for commercial use of white space, wherever it appears. Bidding will now begin for use of the next four lines:




.
posted by twoleftfeet at 4:52 AM on October 18, 2008 [1 favorite]


It's like the free proxies they offer for people in countries the US doesn't like. It might let you see the Iranian dissident websites, but the supposed 'free-speech' enabling proxy blocks access to porn because we don't want to be spending taxpayer dollars on that, you know.

(on further reading, i see that they're considering letting adults opt out, but i'm suspicious of what even that could entail.)
posted by dunkadunc at 5:30 AM on October 18, 2008


Oh dear. Without internet pornography, I'll have to go back to hiring prostitutes.
posted by Mr. President Dr. Steve Elvis America at 6:07 AM on October 18, 2008


MPDSEV: thus keeping that money in the local economy!
posted by rmd1023 at 7:27 AM on October 18, 2008


radio.metafilter.com?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:37 AM on October 18, 2008


I'm sick of the FCC giving away the airwaves that belong to us to corporations who make massive profits with them, and somehow don't owe dick to the tax payers.
posted by paisley henosis at 7:54 AM on October 18, 2008 [4 favorites]


I'm sick of the FCC giving away the airwaves that belong to us to corporations who make massive profits with them, and somehow don't owe dick to the tax payers.

Well, the FCC has given us some goodies, notably the 2.4ghz range, the 5ghz range, etc. (I think 900mhz also). I wish they would free up this old TV range for anyone to use but it doesn't look like they will.

Oh well.
posted by delmoi at 8:00 AM on October 18, 2008


That free wireless thing is not going to work, both for technical and legal reasons.
posted by krinklyfig at 9:41 AM on October 18, 2008


Free dial-up ISPs got away with ad insertion of various sorts when they were popular, usually framesets, sometimes embedded in the browser chrome instead of technically being in the document. I'm not sure if any of them ever served up ads contextually to suit the page content — you better believe they'd do that this time around.

Well, turns out that's not a good business plan. The infrastructure costs more than the ads can bring in. Same problem when it was attempted with broadband. The only way free access can work is if it's subsidized. But, like free speech and the library, I'm not sure their proposals to block content will withstand constitutional challenges.
posted by krinklyfig at 9:44 AM on October 18, 2008


I wish they would free up this old TV range for anyone to use but it doesn't look like they will.

um, that's what the link/post was about :P
Backers of "white spaces" devices got a major boost today as FCC Chair Kevin Martin came out in support of the effort to open empty TV spectrum for unlicensed wireless use... A vote on Martin's plan will come on election day, November 4, according to tentative FCC agenda released today. Commissioners Copps and Adelstein are understood to be generally supportive of white spaces, so Martin's vote may create a bipartisan majority regardless of whether Commissioners Tate and McDowell hop aboard the white spaces train.
sorry if it wasn't clear!

oh and re: corporations that "somehow don't owe dick to the tax payers," the AWS-3 (smut-free) band auction would require the winner to "pay a small portion of its revenue each year to the United States Treasury," so i guess that's something at least...
posted by kliuless at 12:19 PM on October 18, 2008


for those still following along :Pcheers!
posted by kliuless at 12:12 PM on October 21, 2008


« Older Koblo, a company from Denmark that makes virtual s...  |  Running Like Wildfire... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments