White House Debuts New Maps Showing Broadband Vacuum (axios.com) 161
The Biden administration Thursday unveiled a new mapping tool that shows much greater gaps in use of high-speed internet service across the U.S. than the government's previous maps reported. From a report: The White House is pushing for big spending to provide more, better broadband service to underserved areas after the pandemic made Americans more dependent than ever on their internet connections. The new, zoomable map draws on a wider pool of data than existing maps by the Federal Communications Commission, which relied exclusively on industry-provided data that overstated broadband penetration.
The map raises questions about the gap between internet availability and actual usage, with usage reports indicating wide swaths of the country are not making a home broadband connection. The new "Indicators of Broadband Need" map, developed by the White House and the telecommunications branch of the Commerce Department, pulls together different data sets from Ookla, M-Lab, Microsoft, the Federal Communications Commission and the Census Bureau. The overlapping data points are meant to paint a picture of the areas that need more, better broadband. The map also includes data on places that reported a lack of connection by computer, smartphone or tablet and information on broadband usage in high-poverty communities.
The map raises questions about the gap between internet availability and actual usage, with usage reports indicating wide swaths of the country are not making a home broadband connection. The new "Indicators of Broadband Need" map, developed by the White House and the telecommunications branch of the Commerce Department, pulls together different data sets from Ookla, M-Lab, Microsoft, the Federal Communications Commission and the Census Bureau. The overlapping data points are meant to paint a picture of the areas that need more, better broadband. The map also includes data on places that reported a lack of connection by computer, smartphone or tablet and information on broadband usage in high-poverty communities.
Broadband vacuum, you say? (Score:5, Funny)
That'll get the house clean a lot faster than my old dial-up vacuum!
Re: (Score:2)
Even comes with IPv6 so now you're fashionable.
Re: (Score:3)
I was hoping for "No way do I want my vacuum connected to the internet! Damn hackers will get control and suck up all my stuff!", but I guess this will have to do.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You win the internet today. Congrats.
New map, same as the old map... (Score:5, Interesting)
I just looked up my parent's house. The phone company's local DSLAM is filled with no ports, so no DSL for them. No cable access either. Right now their only choice is Wildblue, and I have a pre-order for Starlink.
Sure enough, the new map shows their neighborhood as having broadband. Nope. Hell, if ISDN was an option I'd take it.
Thank God the local electric co-op has been allowed to get into the fiber game. They should have fiber by 2023.
Re: New map, same as the old map... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Wonder where we report discrepancies like that. The Ookla report for my own census tract is about right, but the form 477 reporting for our census block is wrong: it suggests we can get fiber when I know we can't.
I hope this is a sign that the administration is not going to tolerate the fudging of numbers, a la "we reach at least one customer in the area so it's 'available' to the whole region".
Re: (Score:3)
I've been working on this for about a year for the small town where I live. The short answer is you don't report it. If you're counted as rural you can report it to the USDA (yes the USDA because when the government thought "hmm who knows about rural they said .. aha the cow people). The USDA will tell you their hands are tied because the legislation requires they trust the information they're given and what they're given comes from the ISPs. CenturyLink in the Southwest is really bad about this.
The
Re: (Score:2)
And then what you get is that the local dinosaur ISP says "although we don't plan to serve these customers, we aren't going to let anyone else serve these customers either" and finds ways (e.g. getting laws passed at the state level) to block it all.
Re: (Score:2)
If you have alternate ISPs, particularly local cooperatives or other small companies that are more than willing to swoop in then you just give your shit ISP plus the others an opportunity to bid. The local ISP can't do anything if the procurement process gives them a fair shot.
They did put up road blocks for small towns that tried to form their own cooperative in states whose laws were murky (North Carolina).
Re:New map, same as the old map... (Score:5, Insightful)
And for a lot of the country, there's only one broadband option. I looked up my house and it's not listed as a Broadband Vacuum, but I only have 1 ISP to choose from: Spectrum. If Spectrum decided to raise their rates to $100 a month, decided to block Netflix and Google, or just plain decided to kick me off and permanently ban me from having their service ever again, I wouldn't have any other option. There are no competitors. I might still be able to get DSL (for more money and slower speed), satellite (even more money and low caps), mobile (caps galore), or dial up (hell no), but none of those are viable options for how I use broadband (work + streaming). Without a healthy competition in the ISP market, too many people are left to the whims of a single company and are unable to switch to someone else.
I question how valid (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
The map is not valid.
Shows my house at 1Gbps/35Mbps, which is as offered ('Gigablast' - up to 1Gbps) by the ONLY ISP offering anything above 25/5Mbps in my area and deliver 400-ish/30-ish Mbps on it.
Cox Comm owns half the city, Warner the other. That's as close to a monopoly as they can legally get these days. Screw these guys.
Questionable methods (Score:3)
One of the highlighted patches near me has a large low-income housing development in it, so I guess that makes sense.
However the other highlighted patch near me is the center of a cemetery. Iâ(TM)m really curious to see what data resulted in that.
Re: (Score:2)
The maintenance trust behind the cemetery. Nobody wants to trench fiber out to the building in the middle through a field of graves.
Re: Questionable methods (Score:3)
The occupants of those graves donâ(TM)t really need high speed internet. The private cemetery can easily trench via the roads snaking all over the cemetery already. It was opened in the 60s, so itâ(TM)s not like they have to worry about unmarked graves.
The patch highlighted as underserved is literally the cluster of buildings in the middle dedicated to housing cremated remains. The only rooms there intended for living humans are some custodial closets.
Re: Questionable methods (Score:5, Funny)
The occupants of those graves donâ(TM)t really need high speed internet.
Even with modern voting practices?
Re: Questionable methods (Score:4, Interesting)
Due to covid, a lot of places have started streaming funerals online for those who are not able to attend physically. To do that, you need a sufficiently fast connection to send the video in a reasonable resolution.
Re: Questionable methods (Score:2)
It is a single property. Very strange that a cluster of buildings is flagged as underserved but the rest of the cemetery is not.
Re: (Score:3)
The parts that you can actually wire things to with electric service? If you were going to be streaming video from the middle of the cemetery, you're not going to plug into an ethernet jack on the headstone.
Re: (Score:2)
a lot of places have started streaming funerals online
Because capturing video and driving back to town for streaming is going to offend the corpse! Some snot nosed kid can't wave/twit live? Its a corpse, it can wait an hour or two for its minute of fame.
First ... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't necessarily want lower prices, just keep them the same.
I get my cable company telling me that they are rolling out new plans. Great! Now my internet is 10 times faster at twice the price. WTF? I never ran into the limits before and now I'm paying double. "But you are getting more! Now you get 11 Gbps. Don't you see? This goes up to ELEVEN, that's like, one more than the other guys."
I didn't ask for more. I want my costs to stop going up.
My guess is that they are happy to keep building faste
Garbage In, Garbage Out (Score:5, Interesting)
My neighborhood has its own census block. The map claims we are offered 1GBps/10Mbps speeds, but that is patently false. The highest terrestrial broadband offered in my census block is 24/2 by AT&T DSL.
Did some digging, and the map is based on ADVERTISING, not actual speeds. Yes there is a cable company that advertises 1gb to our neighborhood, but if you call and order it, you get the "we don't serve your address" message.
So government thinks we have broadband, but we don't.
But that kind of ineptitude is expected and typical of government.
Re:Garbage In, Garbage Out (Score:5, Insightful)
That's corporate malice, not government ineptitude. We don't fund the govt enough to actually investigate this, so they have to rely on self-reporting. If companies were honest this wouldn't be an issue, but...
Re: (Score:2)
It's a little bit of both since the government takes corporate donations and, in a totally separate decision *wink* *wink* doesn't look too closely at the figures the corporation is reporting.
Re: (Score:2)
It can't be both?
Corporate malice constraining service, sure.
Government ineptitude at identifying it and reporting it.
One might in turn say 'it's corporations paying the right people not to notice/investigate' - that's just another confluence of corporate malice and a corrupt/venal/failed government that CAN BE BOUGHT.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You get the government you pay for (or the government you let get paid by those who don't represent the interest of actual people, see Citizens United)
Re: (Score:2)
Where to get reliable data? (Score:2)
So, you honest citizen decide to form a non-profit to report ACTUAL internet speeds at reasonable prices for consumers (since people with enough $ can pay to extend service just to themselves.)
After all the time/effort to get proper numbers and keep that up to date, Biden uses you as the new data source. Then you discover being a single source, every entity that does not like your facts starts threatening you with lawsuits; but you hold your ground. Then you have actual lawsuits which you'll win but only
Dial-up doesn't count (Score:2)
The map shows larger voids because someone at the White House realized that 300 baud dial-up access doesn't count as broadband.
Re: (Score:2)
Reminds me of the Obama-era food desert map (Score:2, Interesting)
Yet another automated, non-curated map with an amazing amount of need shown because of invented criteria that are almost meaningless.
The Obama era map had 'food deserts' in the strangest places, like San Quentin prison.
This map would lead one to believe that over 3/4ths of the country has almost no internet access, based on contrived criteria that means nothing
Re: (Score:2)
I remember that useless map, and the fact that for some bizarre reason it didn't list locally owner grocers or mini-marts. It showed vast swaths of north Texas as a "food desert" despite there being like 7 grocery stores in Denton alone.
This map seems equally brain dead.
Re: (Score:2)
The Obama era map had 'food deserts' in the strangest places, like San Quentin prison.
Sounds like something that meets the parameters (population center with no grocery stores nearby). People don't even want to fund the initial study. It's hard to imagine fighting for funding to then find the flaws and fund the work to correct for them. Certainly this stuff is done by lowest bidding contractors.
Seriously? (Score:5, Funny)
Broadband Vacuum
This IoT crap has gotten way out of hand ... :-)
Ever heard of Elon Musk? (Score:2)
Starlink just filled Biden's map solid. On behalf of Musk - you're welcome.
Re: (Score:2)
While StarLink is here in my area, it’s currently closed to new subscribers until they get more satellites up. Estimated end of 2023.
Where I am, advertised is 16/12 but testing is closer to 12/7. High Speed WiFi. I will say, it’s a perfectly good speed for working from home though. I’m a Unix admin and my wife is a MS SQL DBA.
[John]
Hmm (Score:2)
Broadband vacuum
For a second there, I thought the "internet of things" had gone too far ...
I call BS. (Score:2, Interesting)
I looked at the grid square that covers the office campus I maintain. Ive got multiple redundant gigabit fiber connections, as well as several high speed cable lines. Yet they flag it as a problem area. WTAF?
But it's to be expected from .gov I guess. They cant get anything right.
Re: (Score:2)
My office has multiple 10 Gbit trans-oceanic connections. We shovel lots of data between continents. Also flagged as a problem. Root cause - we don't use a cable company.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Does your office campus share internet with the entire county?
Irrelevant. First of all, its a grid square of a couple hundred acres, not the entire county. (which in this case is the ENTIRE city....which is 400square miles. )
This is supposed to show (lack of) availability of HIGH SPEED internet. In which it fails. I'm not an ISP so my sharing is not the issue. I'm a consumer just like you. AND my neighbors as well. They too can get the same internet I can .
I can get gigabit fiber internet, as well as high speed (100x10 cable) from multiple internet providers. And I
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No it's not supposed to show lack of availability of high speed internet, read the title of the fucking page. If some of your neighbors don't have fast internet that is an indicator of need.
How does the lack of purchasing something that exists indicate need? Need would be nobody buying it because its not available. If a store sells haggis but nobody buys it, is that also demonstrating a NEED for haggis? LOL
My point was simply that the map is flawed due to flawed logic. I know of several pockets in town where there is need because there is no service. (typically because the carrier doesnt want to hassle with crossing a right of way.) But its instead showing areas of "need" simply because they d
Awful map (Score:2)
This map shows that my college campus, where 20 years ago I was maxing out my 100mbps dorm connection downloading The Lord of the Rings (*cough* I mean homework assignments), is a broadband desert with maximum speeds of 10 down / 9 up.
What junk.
Re: (Score:2)
Bullshit. (Score:2)
T-Mobile (and others soon, I think Verizon has it or is coming out with it) has broadband offerings. I just checked my neighborhood and they claim red areas nearby when I in fact just switched to Tmobile and get 200+Mbps down (60 down on a bad day) and 15 or so up, $60 flat no data cap. I'm dropping cox because it's way cheaper.
They need to add explicit home broadband service (I get not adding "you can use your phone as a hotspot" type broadband) over wireless to their data.
Fiber (Score:2)
We need fiber. Fiber is the future. It's immune to electromagnetic interference, unlike copper, and its potential is greater than satellite / wireless will ever be.
To add fuel to the fire, China has grown their fiber optic networks much faster than the US has theirs.
We will still be dicking around, arguing about whether 10 mbps counts as broadband, when they fly past us.
Personally, I consider anything less than Gigaethernet to not be broadband. You just can't do a lot with low bandwidth / asymmetric.
I want
OMG! (Score:2)
According to this map, there's no internet access in Canada!
Wait, how am I able to post this then?!
Not my map! (Score:2)
It's Garbage (Score:2)
This map is horrible. I zoom in on my neighborhood and the census blocks listed as not having broadband make no sense. I know for a fact my either neighborhood has fiber optic available. I think it's highly inaccurate just because a couple of old people in a neighborhood don't own a computer it's listed as being not having any service.
Much like ISP maps...this one isn't based on reality.
Why 25? (Score:2)
We've had this conversation any number of times.
Clearly this site is trying to make a case that we should spend taxpayer dollars to pull fiber all over the country so everyone can get 25 Mbps service. Can we agree that's what they're trying to accomplish?
That's fine. Go ahead and make the case if you want. But this isn't compelling, not yet.
To be truly compelling, I'd need to see answers to:
Re: (Score:3)
Many of those places grow your food
Re: (Score:2)
Many of those places grow your food
Yeah. Ironically with internet-connected smart tractors.
"We raise broadband hogs. It's a special breed."
Re:orly? (Score:4, Insightful)
In the western US there are vast tracts of land with no inhabitants. None. No farms. Nothing. Then there are areas with much less than 1 person per square mile--These are open range ranches, dry farms, etc. Providing fiber or wired broadband to these places is incredibly expensive and stupid. It would be much cheaper to give them satellite access or cell access. Any econ major can tell you that it is horrendously expensive to get that last 5% of cases. Biden saying 100% is actually stupid because in the real world it is impossible.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Big oil companies will put intranet lines in between head office and sites (as time IS money). Then they got the idea to sell the dark portion of their network to ISPs.
IE free market at work baby.
Re: (Score:3)
It might be better to say "they grow your food and make your unlicensed pharmaceuticals"
I haven't looked at most of the US, so far just in the Phoenix area, and I don't think they grow food in the areas marked red. Take for example the town of Guadalupe, Arizona; the whole town, 100% of it, has access to reasonably fast broadband, but most of them wouldn't be interested in broadband unless it came with crack. Within the Phoenix metro area, most of the other areas marked as red seem to be industrial areas wi
Re: (Score:2)
Many of those places grow your food
While I agree with you that the OP is a troll and his comment was idiotic at best, you should note that many of the places that don't grow my food build the machinery people in the internet vacuums rely upon to grown that food so it kind of evens out. Now go find a better argument to guilt-trip people in industrial areas with.
Re: (Score:2)
It really wasn't meant as a guilt thing. I was trying to point out that some people need to live in places away from cities for society to function.
Re: (Score:2)
It really wasn't meant as a guilt thing. I was trying to point out that some people need to live in places away from cities for society to function.
Perhaps, but it is frequently used that way by rural politicians who then go back to the farm, climb into their modern high tech fully computerised tractor, switch on the WiFi and watch some shows on Netflix while they do some relaxing farm work. I'd bet my bottom dollar that if you took away their high tech tractors most farmers would not know which end of a horse you hook a plow onto because horses is what they'd be using for their farm work.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not socialism when a red state benefits!
Re: orly? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
So you dig the trench yourself and setup a community fiber co-op.
Re: orly? (Score:5, Interesting)
well if I'm going foot the bill I might as well own the line instead of giving it to the cable company. These fuckers get hand outs from the government then turn around and demand extra, then sneak in fake rental fees and fake taxes to scam us further. Seriously if we're going to allow these companies to do whatever the hell they want the very least is we can cut them off from the government teat.
Re: orly? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
A lot of states place onerous rules on who can install broadband service. It's designed to help protect the ruling ISP's monopoly - even if the ISP doesn't provide service to that area. Google found this out when they tried rolling out Google Fiber and a lot of towns ran into it when they tried to deploy municipal broadband.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
the converse is a more interesting question: why doesn't everyone live at work, like farmers have done for thousands of years.
Re: (Score:3)
How many well-off farmers do you think do not have broadband already? With modern high tech farming it is a business expense, and not one of their larger ones, amortized over time. A new broadband initiative is not going provide it to people who already have it.
Re: (Score:2)
Damn, yer right. Look at all those interstate roadways you aren't using. They shouldn't be subsidized by your tax dollars. Or all those Blue_Hairs you aren't even related to and yet you have to contribute to their SS and Medicare.
Re: orly? (Score:2)
Why ammo seeing it more like $30k salary?
The 30k is more in line with what I know the people that grow mushrooms make around here (my friends uncle owns a mushroom farm and makes more in like with the 139k you're mentioning, but the median household income of people that work that farm is far lower.
https://www.google.com/search?... [google.com]
Re:orly? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's the 21st century. Why should there be anywhere in the United States without access to any broadband internet?
We had telephone service everywhere in the US over a half-century ago. We're over a decade late getting broadband service in the US. It would be well worth the public investment in gained productivity and economic activity.
Re: orly? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
If copper lasted 50+ years with relatively minimal maintenance cost, then yeah - let's get fiber going to those 3 households. Amortized over 50 years, the base equipment would cost about $30/mo. per household. And these are farms, they are likely businesses with a measurable amount of economic impact. It would be in the interest of taxpayers to subsidize this - but not by way of subsidy payments by the government - instead by spreading out the cost through everyone's subscriber rates and the telco being
Re: orly? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Carriers HAVE to use Fischel, a union shop
The government is not going to mandate a business relationship with a company by name. So it sounds like you mean they've hamstrung themselves to avoid having to do this or you have yourself a business opportunity.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The government is not going to mandate a business relationship with a company by name.
But the government will demand that the work be done with licensed workers, with another arm of the same government deciding who gets licenses.
Re: (Score:2)
A horsefarm nearby got quoted $250k just for directional boring the fiber to their farm.
Why the heck would you need to do directional boring? It's needed if you have to cross roads or drill below structures. In rural areas all you need is a trencher. Then you can either lay conduits or just use direct burial cable. It's doable for about $20k per _mile_.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: orly? (Score:2)
You don't directional bore under a barn. You stop the trench at the barn and put the equipment on the side or in a closet. Just like in the city you don't directional bore under houses.
Re: orly? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: orly? (Score:2)
Great stuff. Super cheap and easy.
Re: (Score:3)
The government paid the telecoms to do this exact thing and they pocketed the money instead.
Re: orly? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: orly? (Score:2)
Re:orly? (Score:5, Funny)
A map of places people purposely chose to live, knowing there was no internet?
Yes, we call that "the entire planet".
Re: (Score:2)
Playboy is not meant to be read.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And as you just stated some people need broadband to do their job or run their business.
Broadband for all is an improvement for all.
Re: (Score:2)
If Starlink works the way it's supposed to, we should see a sea of green all over that entire US map five years from now with minimal government spending.
That information isn't going to help the telcos get their pork, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you looked at a Satellite plan lately? Sure, you can get maybe 20-50Mbps at a latency measured in seconds. For a total of 20GB or so for a month. You get to pay huge overages if you want more.
The broadband availability definition needs to include latency in the measure (and caps), even if it's not technically correct.
Starlink will supposedly improve on that but I'm not holding my breath. I think they're way underestimating the demand once they're widely available. Their pricing is too competitive
One hour of broadband a day = 378 GB/mo (Score:2)
Have you looked at a Satellite plan lately? Sure, you can get maybe 20-50Mbps at a latency measured in seconds.
I anticipate that MacMann would counter that the latency of 4G cellular Internet is far less than that of geostationary satellite Internet.
The broadband availability definition needs to include latency in the measure (and caps), even if it's not technically correct.
Then let me try to formalize treatment of caps. MacMann would have a harder time countering this.
The FCC defines a "broadband" home Internet connection as providing 25 Mbps download and 3 Mbps upload speeds. These total 28 Mbps, or 28 * 3600 = 100,800 megabits per hour, or 100,800 / 8000 = 12.6 gigabytes per hour
However, geostationary satellite and cellular Internet plan
Re: (Score:2)
20 years from now the old people of today will be dead or largely irrelevant, while younger tech literates will replace them.