ITIF's "The Need for Speed" Shows Why We Need Big Broadband

Yesterday I had the good fortune to attend ITIF's event marking the release of their new report entitled "The Need for Speed" in which they lay out the case for how big broadband pipes can be used and why the status quo for broadband deployment won't get us where we need to go.

I highly recommend reading the report and watching the video of the event, both of which can be found here.

Here's a running diary of some of the impressions I jotted down while watching the presentation:

- Rob Atkinson kicked things off by admitting that it was harder to do this report than they initially thought going in. The reason? There aren't yet a ton of apps that require big broadband connectivity. But he then flipped this to argue that over the history of technology as new capacity becomes available we always have found ways to utilize it. And he thinks the same thing will happen with new apps that use big broadband. He finished this thought with the interesting statement that it's depressing if we think today's broadband Internet is as good as it gets.

- He continued on to suggest that a market-driven approach alone won't get us the big broadband we need as quickly as we want it because private operators don't realize all of the network externalities that the public receives from having these big pipes available. Because of this some form of government incentives/subsidies are needed, and that achieving big broadband everywhere is the goal the government should be shooting for.

- And as a quick anecdote highlighting that there's a lot of work to be done, Rob admitted that they'd originally wanted to do an HD videoconference at the event but they found it too difficult because of the lack of sufficient connectivity, despite us being located in the heart of our nation's capitol.

- Then Stephen Ezell, the report's author, took the stage. He then made a series of terrific points: 1. This connectivity will be woven into the fabric of our lives, 2. Without action now we'll fall further and further behind other nations, 3. We don't have enough bandwidth today to handle single applications like HD video and we need networks that can support simultaneous usage.

- He then went into the four transformative functions of big broadband networks: faster file transfers, video streaming, real-time collaboration, and improving all facets of society. I'll explore these in greater detail in future posts.

- One fascinating comment he made regarding how broadband can help green our economy is that the use of IT can replace the consumption of fossil fuels. While of course we all now how videoconferencing can replace the need for driving, this was the first time I'd heard someone equate IT with fossil fuel use so directly, and it's great way to put things.

- Next up was Jeffrey Campbell from Cisco. He urged people to look at the data, especially from a historical perspective. The introduction of broadband changed the way we use the Internet, just as the introduction of big broadband will shift the paradigm in new ways.

- Then he suggested we look at businesses to gauge the growing demand for bandwidth. Used to be corporate LANs were 1Mbps, then 10Mbps, then 100Mbps. The way he put it is that businesses don't invest in infrastructure like this unless there's a payoff, so they're obviously seeing the value in having big broadband connectivity.

- He hit the nail on the head when he said this need for more bandwidth is all about video. And I had to resist standing up to cheer with a loud, "Amen!" when he pointed out that better broadband is key to all of President Obama's priorities: jobs, education, healthcare, and the green economy.

- One very interesting point he made was that the reason most all of the big Internet companies (Google, Amazon, Yahoo, etc.) were started in the US is because we got the first generation of broadband first. Yet just because we're broadband leaders today doesn't mean we'll stay in that position tomorrow. As other countries get big broadband, they're going to get out ahead of us in creating the third generation of Internet applications, and that's a critically important economic development issue. This message in particular is one all of our policymakers need to hear: the future of our digital economy depends on getting big broadband pipes out there as quickly as possible so we can enable/empower our innovators.

- Cisco then demonstrated their Healthcare Interpreter Network. It's essentially a videoconferencing unit that ties into a network of interpreters across seemingly the entire spectrum of international languages, I think 170 in total. They're installing these units in hospitals so if patients come in who don't speak English, healthcare providers can still interact with them. It's a brilliant, practical use of videoconferencing that I hope we start seeing all across the country soon.

- The next speaker was Chris Vein, CIO for the city of San Francisco. Unfortunately my notes aren't as detailed for his remarks as I was too enthralled listening to him speak. Needless to say they're doing a ton of interesting things regarding overcoming the digital divide, and I'm planning on following up with him to try and get him on a VidChat to share all the details.

- But one point I did want to pull out from his comments was his frustration over an experience where local content creators came to him begging for a level of connectivity that they weren't able to get from private providers so they could run their business. He had a municipal network nearby that they could've used, but because of restrictions that only that network could only be used for non-profit purposes his hands were tied and the city risked losing a local business. It's unacceptable that we're hamstringing communities to not be able to fully utilize the resources at their disposal. We have to find a way to move past these short-sighted attempts to protect private providers in situations like this when it may mean hurting the public good to do so.

- The final speaker was John Windhausen of Telepoly. He highlighted how much of the innovation going on with big broadband is happening in educational and research settings. He then turned to the topic of stimulus dollars and pointed out that the key to determining how best to spend them will be the definition of "underserved" which is the most salient point of debate still to be resolved.

Final couple of thoughts:

- I asked the question of given the fact that we're going to have single applications that require 100Mbps+ within the next ten years and that all broadband investments should be thought of as long-term infrastructure, whether or not stimulus dollars should prioritize projects that deliver next-generation broadband over current broadband. And there was general agreement, though Rob suggested that we need to maintain a stance of technological neutrality, which I take some issue with given that not all broadband technologies can deliver next-generation speeds. But at least it seemed like most of the people on the panel would agree that money would be better spent on something like fiber vs. something like BPL.

- Jim Baller, chairman of the US Broadband Coalition, asked where the 50Mbps number that's cited as next-generation broadband came from and whether it's the near-term or long-term goal we should be aiming for. Rob's response was that he kept the number at 50Mbps to try and be more pragmatic than going all the way to 100Mbps or beyond, but then he also admitted that the amount of bandwidth we need will continue to evolve and grow over time. So I took that to mean that 50Mbps is the floor, not the ceiling.