Joho the Blog
|
|
|
April 04, 2006
Michael Powell is interviewed by Jonathan Krim. Powell: We are looking at a radical reframing of spectrum. I've always been a big fan of open spectrum. But there's very little spectrum left to give out. [That is, he's a fan of opening spectrum, not of Open Spectrum in the sense of unlicensing spectrum and letting smart/cognitive radios negotiate frequencies.] And it requires coordinating with many many agencies: DoD, Dept. of Transportation, etc. Q: Would Net neutrality matter if there were more competition? A: I'm not happy with there being so few competitors. I'd like to see gov't dedicate more of its energy to developing alternative platforms. Multi-platform competition is the key. If we're going to get the Star Trek world I dream about in which you flip open your device and you're connected to the world's information, you need at least three ways of connecting. Anti-trust lawyers like me believe magic things happen at three. Q: Will three come quickly enough? Powell: It's a mistake to rely on the government to maintain Net neutrality. The legislators have a very shallow understanding of the tech. Let the weight of inertia be on your side. Don't play their game. Q: Should gov'ts be prohibited from launching muni wifi? Q: Is it fair for consumers to think of the Internet as a public place? Q: (Isenberg) At the FCC, you did at least 3 great things, one of which survives: You created a more technologically literate commission. That survives. Then you initiated the spectrum policy re-thinking, which stopped when you left. Third, you articulated the four Internet freedoms which the current restatement significantly waters down. A: Maybe we need a secretary of technology.... Q: Does the common carrier model work for where we're headed? Posted
by D. Weinberger at April 4, 2006 09:07 AM
|