Something Better than Gigabit

RantWoman has been trying to stay on task for other problems today, but  the recent collapse of the Gigabit Squared proposal to upgrade Seattle's broadband infrastructure is demanding attention.  As the newly  elected president of a nonprofit all about digital inclusion, RantWoman has therefore decided that blogging about the Gigabit deal IS on task.

If RantWoman is really diligent, she will even manage to tie her reflections about what parts of town figure in different broadband deals somehow to celebration of Martin Luther King Day. (Hint: RantWoman has looked at city-generated maps of lots of different aspects of public infrastructure and population demographics. Guess which color ranges and blobs tend to run in parallel.)   Imagine!

The following article though offers more than enough basis for RantWoman to weigh in.
http://kuow.org/post/how-seattles-bid-faster-cheaper-internet-fell-apart

This item is not RantWoman's sole source of information. For instance, RantWoman regularly hangs out at public meetings of #CTTAB, the City Telecommunications and Technology Advisory Board, http://www.seattle.gov/cttab RantWoman also sometimes gets other actual reading done. 

RantWoman would like to suggest that the collapse of the Gigabit deal offers people who care about ubiquitous, competitive access to broadband connectivity and the resources and economic potential of the internet an opportunity to aim for something better! This does not mean RantWoman off the top of her head has any idea how to finance it but RantWoman has a sense that if people start with a broader vision, there are opportunities to be discovered.

RantWoman was interested to learn in initial plans for the Gigabit deal of proposals to put wireless equipment on the rooftops of several public housing complexes around the city. RantWoman quickly learned several things:

--Offers like this have been made before and not materialized.

--Putting things up on the housetop, essentially renting out one's roof, may  or may not translate into better, cheaper, faster options for those living in the buildings. For offers like this to be credible in the first place, there needs to be some clear plan that improves connectivity for residents.

--Public Housing complexes are not unlike many other kinds of multifamily housing as far as variations in topography, technological infrastructure already installed, and financial capacity of residents. A plan that only relies on property tax will address none of these issues and will leave out of consideration consumers who might not even realize they have a great deal to gain from improved broadband access.

--People who live in public housing are not the only ones who need CHOICES  and low cost, high-performance connectivity. For the potential of connectivity to be realized, it needs to be ubiquitous, not just limited to a few neighborhoods. RantWoman also has a sense, baed on complaints she hears and people's comments about how much they pay for different kinds of service, that much of Seattle could definitely stand to get better deals.

--Here, in terms of market, RantWoman is also compelled to note that building taller multifamily housing and promoting greater density should have SOME potential for helping make the case for economically viable improvements in connectivity.

--RantWoman has lots of post graduate education. RantWoman has done lots of frontline technical support and is not shy about trying to wade into legalese, even legalese that arrives in the form of acres of tiny print. But RantWoman frequently finds both technical support and customer service aspects of her own telecomm providers' services overwhelming and extremely irritating.  Thus, public buy-in and investment and ability to make a profit seem like important considerations, but RantWoman does not really want to leave the expansion of broadband access to the imagination only of telecomm company marketing departments. RantWoman has no idea what kind of public participation process to suggest to help neighborhoods identify needs and barriers to expanded broadband access but RantWoman would like to see this occur and see what deals might flower as a result, not wait for a deal of some kind and then address granular neighborhood detail.

RantWoman urges people who envision robust competition and ubiquitous service to think about the whole spectrum of educational needs, not just the University of Washington. RantWoman assumes that people on the forefront of national research and development can come up with all kinds of ways to use enhanced broadband capability, but what about the scientists of tomorrow? If everything from informational databases to job applications is all available on the internet, a child in school needs hours of internet access daily just to do homework.  In Seattle,  parents also need internet access and the skills to use technology just to monitor some views of their children's academic progress.

Yet for many families, the only access is through libraries or community centers. These public locations tend to be overwhelmed by demand and to provide only an hour or so of access per person per day, not nearly enough to do bare minimum necessary activity, let alone support robust learning, self-training,and interchange of information. So when RantWoman hears about the next possible citywide broadband deal, RantWoman wants to hear as much about how the deal will affect young people throughout the city as she does about how it will affect the University of WA.

RantWoman would like the next round of conversation to think about what people need, not just what one sector says. City of Seattle CTO Erin Devoto talks about lots of people accessing city services with mobile devices. RantWoman does not want to dispute this, but RantWoman does find herself wondering whether Ms. Devoto either has thought about all the other strands of life people need broadband access for or  has tried to do ordinary, increasingly computerized activities on a mobile device.

RantWoman a few months ago took the plunge and got a Smartphone. The investment IS making RantWoman really happy, but RantWoman cannot imagine even wanting to try any of the following activities on her Smartphone:

--Stepping through the WA Health Insurance Exchange website

--Interacting with DSHS websites. (or waiting in phone queues, but that is a different issue)

--reading publications from the IRS

--filling out an online job application.

--even editing a simple document like a blog post.

--So far, RantWoman has read too much about insecure apps even to want to think about banking by mobile.

--RantWoman also let a favorite fast food chain install an app on one of RantWoman's devices. Now RantWoman is so annoyed by updates, uneven accessibility experiences, and overwhelmingly zooey look and feel of the app that the app is likely to be the last thing that influences RantWoman's decision whether or not to visit. RantWoman considers this a problem since she WOULD like better information than she can get about menu options inside the chain's stores. RantWoman is also sitting with enthusiasm for the $15 minimum wage and trying to sync that with the realities of her own enthusiasm for fast food but let us stick to technology.

RantWoman recognizes good reasons others' mobile experience mileage may vary. RantWoman also knows LOTS of reasons many people quite prefer just doing business in person and needs a broadband vision that facilitates community presence, community connections, not just everyone hiding at home--or in public--behind their screens!