<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Communications Insights: Trends and Cool Stuff</title>
	<atom:link href="http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff</link>
	<description>The Musings of an Expatriate in European Communications</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Jan 2011 14:07:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Water, Air, and Wetting One’s Pants</title>
		<link>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/11/water-air-and-wetting-ones-pants/</link>
		<comments>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/11/water-air-and-wetting-ones-pants/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Nov 2010 21:24:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth Carter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Open Source]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Andriod]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nokia]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/?p=235</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A few weeks ago, Anssi Vanjoki, who is outgoing head of Nokia’s smartphone division, offered this gem:  He stated that using the open source Android operating system as the basis for a smartphone is like Finnish boys who “pee in their pants” to keep warm in the winter.  It affords temporary relief, but leaves you in a worse position in the end.  I have been thinking about this approach and am convinced it is not the right question.  In the final analysis, the question is not about peeing to stay warm but whether you can maintain a competitive advantage in an increasingly competitive market place – this is independent of your individual choices.  Open source software will continue to make the marketplace increasingly competitive, whether one chooses to use it or not.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/11/water-air-and-wetting-ones-pants/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Defining the Open Internet</title>
		<link>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/11/defining-the-open-internet/</link>
		<comments>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/11/defining-the-open-internet/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Nov 2010 19:50:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth Carter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Broadband]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Optimal Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FCC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Network Neutrality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Optimal level of regulation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/?p=232</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Earlier this week I was contacted by Seth Johnson who was organizing a response to the FCC’s Further Inquiry into Two Underdeveloped Issues in the Open Internet Proceeding.  Seth asked if I would consider signing on in support of joint comments which urge the FCC to consider appropriate distinction between the open Internet and “specialized services” in light of changes in the market. As I said in previous Cool Stuff, both basic packet Internet and specialized services are important components of a robust and diverse market place.  I jointed the statement along with 31 other distinguished experts in this field.

Both the open Internet and specialized services exist in the market, and have for some time.  However, this is an important juncture to define: 1) where one begins and the other ends and 2) what are the appropriate measures necessary to preserve competition and fair play.  I joined on the comments because it does not advocate a particular policy outcome.  Rather, we urge the FCC that by “addressing this distinction in itself enables the analysis and pursuit of policy goals to proceed with a profound new level of clarity.”  This is of particular national importance.  The Internet is an American invention.  It is and will continue to be an important ingredient to economic development and global competitiveness.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/11/defining-the-open-internet/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rethinking the White Spaces decision</title>
		<link>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/09/rethinking-the-white-spaces-decision/</link>
		<comments>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/09/rethinking-the-white-spaces-decision/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Sep 2010 18:33:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth Carter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cool Stuff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TV White Spaces]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wireless Communications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broadband]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FCC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Part 15]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Policy Development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spectrum]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/?p=223</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[At the FCC’s monthly agenda meeting it unanimously adopted its Second Memorandum Opinion and Order which will enable unlicensed operation in the TV White Spaces.  The Chairman and Commissioners almost universally stated that the Order would unleash a wave of innovation, broadband access, “Wi-Fi on steroids,” and other Really Cool Stuff What was universally not said was that broadcast TV and wireless microphones are not the future.  Granted, regulators want to provide regulatory certainty and are loathe to picking winners and losers; however, this glaring absence begs the question: if all of the innovation, job growth, and economic development will come from the unlicensed use of the White Spaces, why aren’t we protecting those uses?]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/09/rethinking-the-white-spaces-decision/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Spectrum Auctions in Japan?!</title>
		<link>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/09/spectrum-auctions-in-japan/</link>
		<comments>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/09/spectrum-auctions-in-japan/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Sep 2010 19:48:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth Carter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Wireless Communications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Japan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[next generation spectrum policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Policy Development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spectrum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spectrum policy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/?p=212</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Japanese wireless market is well developed, with at least 5 competitors offering some of the lowest priced, highest speed, and most advanced networks of anywhere in the world. Yet, according modern economic theory, this should not be. The Japanese government has never held an auction to assign spectrum licenses. Economic theory suggests that auctions are more efficient assigning spectrum rights to their highest monetary value use than other means such as comparative hearings (currently used in Japan) or lotteries. That may all, change as the government of Japan is considering how it might employ spectrum auctions. The Cabinet might be directing the Ministry of Information and Communications to review how market forces can be employed to rapidly and efficiently reassign radio usage rights. According to my vague understanding of what is suggested, the MIC will pursue a limited use of auctions to reassign spectrum licenses. Auction prices will be limited to the costs of relocating the existing users from the band. The MIC will then auction participant’s bids as part of its analysis in some sort of comparative hearing. License winners will have to pay their bid eventually. I am not sure whether auctions will make the Japanese wireless market more advanced, or whether they will simply screw things up. I will keep you posted.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/09/spectrum-auctions-in-japan/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>That’s not the Internet</title>
		<link>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/08/that%e2%80%99s-not-the-internet/</link>
		<comments>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/08/that%e2%80%99s-not-the-internet/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Aug 2010 20:56:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth Carter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Broadband]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Network Neutrality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Access]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/?p=205</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I have continued to think about a tiered Internet as considered in the Google Verizon proposal on Network Neutrality.  I conclude that managed services already exist in the market place, but it is not the Internet. The Internet is an interconnected, end-to-end, packet switched network. There is nothing inherently anti-competitive about broadband service providers marketing managed services.  There is also nothing new about it.  However, it would be false advertising to claim it is the Internet.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/08/that%e2%80%99s-not-the-internet/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Taking the Roof off of the Internet</title>
		<link>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/08/taking-the-roof-off-of-the-internet/</link>
		<comments>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/08/taking-the-roof-off-of-the-internet/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Aug 2010 20:00:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth Carter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Broadband]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Network Neutrality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Optimal Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FCC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Verizon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/?p=200</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The recent legislative proposal on Network Neutrality proposed by Google and Verizon would "allow broadband providers to offer additional, differentiated online services, in addition to the Internet access and video services (such as Verizon's FIOS TV) offered today." Some critics have argued that that the deal would create a two-tiered Internet, one upper tier for differentiated services and one lower tier for commodity packets.  Google Verizon proposal is not so much a threat to network neutrality (lower case) as it is to network economics.  Part of this is the public face of a private bargaining game. Players in the value chain are using the political and regulatory process as they struggle to gain a larger share of that chain.  It is not evil, merely self-interested.  That is fine.  At some level, Google and Verizon should be lauded for working towards a compromise and to move things forward.  In the end, either competition or regulation must constrain this self-interest.  And, private actors they should not get to make public policy.  That is the exclusive domain of Congress and the FCC.  The FCC should take those views into account then offer its own independent decision to impose regulation or not.

]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/08/taking-the-roof-off-of-the-internet/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Solving Network Neutrality</title>
		<link>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/08/solving-network-neutrality/</link>
		<comments>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/08/solving-network-neutrality/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 19:23:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth Carter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Network Neutrality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Optimal Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FCC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unbundling]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/?p=196</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Much has been said in regard to the recent Google-Verizon proposal on Network Neutrality and the collapse of talks at the FCC.  The rough consensus is that the deal would create a two-tiered Internet.  If a two-tiered Internet is a good thing, then a competitive market will support it.  However, there has been a reduction of competition in Internet access in the US.  This follows from a series of FCC decisions which basically eviscerated its local competition rules (mostly in the form of unbundling) in favor of “market solutions”.  There is now a unique opportunity to move beyond the Network Neutrality debate.  The FCC should take this opportunity to revisit its unbundling rules to craft rules which can enable competition in Internet access networks while mitigating disincentives to invest.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/08/solving-network-neutrality/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>An MBA’s Thoughts on Taxes and Deficits</title>
		<link>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/08/taxes-and-deficit/</link>
		<comments>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/08/taxes-and-deficit/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 20:28:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth Carter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Optimal Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taxes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/?p=194</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I don’t like paying taxes.  No one likes paying taxes.  If you like to pay taxes, you should have your head examined.  Nonetheless, we all like the benefits that taxes can buy – the common defense and the general welfare, including: police, courts, highways, national defense, etc.  What the reduce-taxes and reduce-the-deficit augment hopes to do is: 1) dispense with a liability while retaining the attendant asset and 2) achieve an objective by deliberately behaving in a way guaranteed to produce these opposite result.  To an MBA’s mind, this is illogical.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/08/taxes-and-deficit/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Back to the Future Station</title>
		<link>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/07/back-to-the-future-station/</link>
		<comments>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/07/back-to-the-future-station/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 Jul 2010 14:28:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth Carter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cool Stuff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wireless Communications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Japan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NTT DOCOMO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RCS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Really Cool Stuff!]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/?p=187</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On my recent business trip to Tokyo, I had the opportunity to have lunch with my good friend Hajime Kii and his family.  I know Kii-san when he was a senior executive at NTT America and I was working at CITI at Columbia University.  Kii-san was kind enough to arrange a visit to NTT DOCOMO’s Future Station while I was in town.  The Future Station is where DOCOMO presents a film showcasing its high-concept vision of its product and service offerings for the near-term future.  The Future Station is very cool.  Being there reminded me why I got into telecommunications in the first place – because tomorrow will always a brighter day with bigger (smaller), better, faster and Cooler Stuff.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/07/back-to-the-future-station/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Report from ITS</title>
		<link>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/07/report-from-its/</link>
		<comments>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/07/report-from-its/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 2010 18:40:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth Carter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cool Stuff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wireless Communications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ITS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RCS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spectrum policy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/?p=181</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Every once and a while, one comes across something so trivial yet so flattering.  I was fortunate enough to attend the International Telecommunications Society 18th Biennial meeting in Tokyo last week.  I attended the panel on radio spectrum on the last day of the conference.  Two of the four papers presented on the spectrum panel were derived in some way from research I published in 2009.
 
I have been working in radio communications for nearly a decade.  It was so encouraging for me to see that my recent work is having such an important impact on the direction of current research.  If you work hard enough and long enough, you sometimes you earn bragging rights.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://kennethrcarter.com/CoolStuff/2010/07/report-from-its/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

