Viva La Cola!

Founded in January 2009, PubliCola is a blog about Seattle written by journalists who are dedicated to non-partisan, original daily reporting that prioritizes a balanced approach to news. Started by longtime local editor and award-winning reporter Josh Feit, PubliCola is the first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol.

PubliCola was off and running. In June 2009, PubliCola hired another award-winning journalist, super-sourced Seattle city hall reporter Erica C. Barnett.

People were afraid that blogging would change journalism. Instead, we believe journalism can change blogging. Twenty-first century journalism may look and feel different, and yes Erica isn't afraid to get cranky, but we're committed to making sure online news still delivers independent, reliable, even-keeled coverage. And most of all, we're committed to making sure the coverage sparks honest civic debate.

Bringing you cola for the people, PubliCola is named after Publius Valerius PubliCola, the alias for the authors of the Federalist Papers—the original bloggers.

The first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol and Seattle city hall, PubliCola has been called a “must-read” by the Seattle Post Intelligencer and a hot “New Media Mover and Shaker” by Seattle Magazine—which also cited our own Erica C. Barnett as the city's No. 1 news nerd.

Speed Trials: Google Plans to Test Superfast Broadband Networks

Google wants to see what it’s like when a community has the fastest available, practical broadband service: 1 gigabit per second (Gbps) over fiber optic lines. (If you don’t remember your computer number prefixes, that’s 1,000 times faster than 1 megabit per second (Mbps)). Most home Internet service is between 1.5 Mbps and 15 Mbps.

Most ordinary Internet use doesn’t improve when you go beyond 25 to 50 Mbps: You can still stream video at the highest available quality, download movies and other files rapidly (a gigabyte in a few minutes or less), and browse the Web at its fastest setting—Web servers typically can’t send you content faster than a few tens of Mbps.

So what’s out there? Two-way video conference, telemedicine (remote diagnosis and high-quality imaging), and connecting among local home and office networks remotely at the same speeds you would get onsite.

Google’s plan is to set up one or more large-scale functional trials—50,000 to 500,000 homes—bringing fiber to the home, a long-simmering notion in Seattle. Fiber-to-the-home (FTTH) service can be vastly higher than telephone and cable wire speeds, which have physical constraints. (You can get a good summary  from my interview with Seattle Chief Technology Officer Bill Schrier.)

Fiber rates can be several Gbps today per fiber strand, with many strands bundled in a single cable in commercial applications. The cost for delivering super-high speeds over fiber isn’t about the distance from a central switching office, but rather the equipment that lives on each end.

There are no widespread commercial 1 Gbps FTTH efforts in the world, although there are trials and pilots, because the cost for end-point home adapters and central-office equipment is simply too high. A mass trial by Google could lead to cheaper 1 Gbps adapters and central gear, and prove that people are willing to subscribe to such networks.

The Google Fiber for Communities effort is soliciting proposals from communities and nominations from residents. Click the Get Involved link to nominate Seattle or another community.

I found out about this effort from the Beacon Hill Blog, which referenced an effort by Tracy Bier, a Seattleite who is trying to put together a coalition of south-and-central neighbors to push for better broadband service. Beacon Hill, the Central District, and other nearby areas have broadband speeds and qualities from existing providers that are the functional equivalent of small, rural towns.

Seattle’s homegrown fiber efforts aren’t dead, however. Mayor Mike McGinn has been dealing with a number of high-profile infrastructure and budget issues, but his office told me a few days ago that the mayor took the time to meet with City-Parish President Joey Durel of Lafayette, Louisiana, when Durel was in Seattle recently for the annual New Partners for Smart Growth Conference.

Durel and his colleagues wanted to build a citywide fiber-to-the-home network to leapfrog the inadequate and sketchily available broadband in Lafayette. The city spent three years in litigation and marketing battles until it won decisively in court and began to build its network. (Amusingly, the delays saved the city money, as the cost of technology dropped far more than the cost of litigation, while allowing the city to install newer gear as well.)

Just last week, the Lafayette’s Utility System (LUS), which manages the fiber network, said it would finish this July, six months ahead of schedule , while already having a higher subscriber rate for triple-play packages than predicted when budgeting for the network. (LUS won’t reveal numbers, but said it’s “many thousands” in a city of more than 110,000.

Less visibly, Seattle fiber advocates continue to work on details of the plan, educate city officials, and gather more evidence that such networks have paid for themselves elsewhere.

It would lovely to imagine Google as a white knight, riding in to slay the incumbent broadband dragons, and carry us off to live in luxury in 1 Gbps wired magical castle. It could happen. But let’s not hold our breath yet.




  • BeHi local

    Yes, when I moved to Beacon Hill and called up Qwest to get their blazing fast internet, they told me the speed available in my area was the same speed as my DIAL UP due to the age of the infrastructure and distance….but they would charge me the same price as the fast internet.

  • susan166

    Google hopes that the new model will fire up the business of being a small, local ISP. T new model http://usspost.com/google-broadband-usspost-com…

  • RFPete

    I live in the CD, and I wish I could get internet speeds of 1.5 Mbps. My connection is usually about half that. And yes I pay Qwest for speeds much higher (I guess I should change that).

  • http://twitter.com/fattailed fattailed

    Not sure google owning the fiber *and* the servers *and* the data is the wisest idea. Who needs a totalitarian political structure when you can just privatize surveillance?
    .
    Dystopian is a good word to know.

  • http://hoby.myopenid.com/ Hoby

    The goal should really be internet as a utility, either free or as free as possible. Do we pay extra (individually) for city streets, firefighters, or similar things deemed as a public priority? No we don't, internet should be considered one of those priorities.

  • giffy

    We do pay extra for water, and sewer, and garbage, and electricity, and phones. The internet is much more like those than a street or police officer.

    By the way we do pay extra for those things. Take a look at your property tax bill or your landlords and you'll likely see an entry for a fire district. Sure its not a monthly bill, but you are paying for it.

  • jabailo

    I've got Clear mobile Wimax. I take my netbook everywhere and I've clocked the speed as high as 11Mbps.

    The Wimax II standard was just published and it will offer speeds of 100Mbps+. All that with no wires whatsoever.

    Why bother with cables and wires and when Wimax can cover 30 square miles with a single tower and provide broadband access instantly?

  • roxanaP

    THis is working just in areas with fiber optics infrastructure already installed. There are many not used fiber optics structures done few years ago.
    I am from Silicon Valley, CA – we do not have this infrastructure in place.
    Nortel was the company that was doing this but is out off the market now.
    As long there are not investments in infrastructure this Google thing will be just a “experiment”, but everybody in the electronic- computer industry knows that it is possible and even very easy with fiber optics. The fiber optics companies lost the fight few years ago- and many people lost their money invested in them then. And their fiber optic infrastructures are just not used.

  • Chris Stefan

    How many other people are you sharing that Wimax tower with? There is a limited amount of total bandwidth each tower can deliver. If 1000 people are all trying to use 100Mbps of total bandwidth at the same time each user is only going to see about 100Kbps.

    Don't get me wrong Wimax has its place, especially for rural areas, it just isn't a panacea that will entirely replace wired services.

  • roxanaP

    I forgot to add – to do infrasrtucture takes time and money. The fiber optical cable have to be wired as are now the phone cables. It is a lot of money in this but it could create a lot of jobs. IT IS VERY EASY TO MAKE ON a small area(50,00) that is probably already with fiber optic infrastructure in place

  • roxanaP

    One more comm. – in this moment technology is just limited by the infrastructure- usually old kind, not “smart” ,. The software, electronic devices, and the technology exist but the bottle neck is the WIRE

  • http://twitter.com/GlennF GlennF

    Yes, Chris has it right. The laws of physics and Shannon's Theorem only let you pass a certain amount of information across a given amount of spectrum. However, you can make smaller cells (fewer square miles covered).

    The 30 sq mi number isn't accurate. WiMax has a lot of “up to” figures: up to 70 mph, 70 miles away, 30 square miles, 70 Mbps, whatever. Those are all dials on a big panel: if you want to cover a dense place like Seattle, cells are at most a few square miles (although you can rejigger them later, and 1 per a few square miles is far better than 50 Wi-Fi nodes for outdoor coverage per square mile).

  • http://yrihf.com/ jabailo

    You're confusing the front end connection with the backplane.

  • http://yrihf.com/ jabailo

    And coming soon!

    http://www.pcworld.com/article/188205/watch_for…

    Watch for WiMAX 2 in 2011

    “Think of it like you're building a 20-lane highway,” says Shakouri, describing how 802.16m can use multiple channels to deliver data. “While it would be complicated to build out 20 lanes on the same highway, you could instead use two 10-lane highways or four five-lane highways. So this is how you can get higher data rates by using a combination of multiple channels.”

  • http://yrihf.com/ jabailo

    Fiber optics is 90s era technology, that is being superceded by Wimax.

    I have been using Clear in the Seattle area for 2 years and this year have subscribed to the mobile option. I take my new ASUS eee Pine Trail Intel notebook everywhere, and can hook up with up to 11Mbps using Clear. Next gen Clear will be 10 times faster.

    We don't need expensive wires and cables anymore. Wimax fits the city, suburbs and rural areas.

  • http://yrihf.com/ jabailo

    I had that problem with DSL here in Kent. The limitation of DSL is 12,000 feet from the CO (Central Office). I was at 17,000 feet so it stunk even though I went through 2 different ISPs. Currently I have Clear Wimax — no wires at all, just direct to the tower and I get between 5 and 8 Mbs in my apartment. With mobile I've clocked it as fast as 11 Mpbs.

    There is no need for conduits and wiring as Clear already has bathed the entire city and surrounding area in broadband.

  • Anonymous

    Well, it’s really good to know about Google’s next planning. As the post content really shows something unique and impressive about Google. This one shows that Google is planning to test superfast broadband networks. And the regarding information of this post really makes me crazy about it. Thanks for sharing some fabulous information about it.