<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	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:creativeCommons="http://backend.userland.com/creativeCommonsRssModule"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: We&#8217;re gonna need a bigger boat</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/05/27/were-gonna-need-a-bigger-boat/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/05/27/were-gonna-need-a-bigger-boat/</link>
	<description>Same old blog, brand new place</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 20:29:45 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Doc Searls</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/05/27/were-gonna-need-a-bigger-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-193804</link>
		<dc:creator>Doc Searls</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 04:41:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1616#comment-193804</guid>
		<description>Yep. And it&#039;ll cost you $10 more per month on your Internet connection to drop TV. 

Did I mention that when my kids and I (they&#039;re in their late 30s now) moved to a town with no cable TV, their grades and test (including SAT) scores went way up?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yep. And it&#8217;ll cost you $10 more per month on your Internet connection to drop TV. </p>
<p>Did I mention that when my kids and I (they&#8217;re in their late 30s now) moved to a town with no cable TV, their grades and test (including SAT) scores went way up?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Eckman</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/05/27/were-gonna-need-a-bigger-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-193410</link>
		<dc:creator>John Eckman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 17:30:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1616#comment-193410</guid>
		<description>Put differently, we have lots of conversations in my household about whether we should keep paying for cableTV. 

We&#039;ve never had a single conversation about whether we should keep our internet access (only which method gets us the best bang for the buck). 

In essence, it&#039;s only the fact that the cable which brings me the internets is the same cable that they push TV through that keeps us hooked up.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Put differently, we have lots of conversations in my household about whether we should keep paying for cableTV. </p>
<p>We&#8217;ve never had a single conversation about whether we should keep our internet access (only which method gets us the best bang for the buck). </p>
<p>In essence, it&#8217;s only the fact that the cable which brings me the internets is the same cable that they push TV through that keeps us hooked up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adriana</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/05/27/were-gonna-need-a-bigger-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-171620</link>
		<dc:creator>Adriana</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 May 2009 14:05:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1616#comment-171620</guid>
		<description>In short, a screen that ships without a mouse, ships broken. (Clay Shirky) :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In short, a screen that ships without a mouse, ships broken. (Clay Shirky) <img src='http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Doc Searls</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/05/27/were-gonna-need-a-bigger-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-171370</link>
		<dc:creator>Doc Searls</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 May 2009 01:45:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1616#comment-171370</guid>
		<description>Great ideas, Russ. *Somebody&#039;s* gonna do it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great ideas, Russ. *Somebody&#8217;s* gonna do it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Russell Nelson</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/05/27/were-gonna-need-a-bigger-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-170540</link>
		<dc:creator>Russell Nelson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 May 2009 05:38:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1616#comment-170540</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m looking at an email I sent to this &quot;doc&quot; guy back in 2007:

1) My house is where it is.  Nothing will change that.  Thus, whatever
I have to pay in terms of capital costs to get fiber to my house is
just another aspect of the capital costs of my house, like the number
of square feet, the type of siding, the number of acres, etc.

2) Businesses have trouble raising capital.  There&#039;s no magic wand;
every kind of capital has its cost, most of which is related to the
risk.  This includes ISPs.

3) My local ISP would be happy to run fiber out to my house, if they
could get sufficient return on the capital expended to cover the cost
of the capital.

Here&#039;s the solution:

4) Just as I have to have somewhere to live, I have to have Internet
access.  It&#039;s a necessity to me.  Thus, I will spend my savings, or
borrow money, to buy a house and, I propose, a fiber run from my ISP&#039;s
POP to my house.

5) I pay them their cost for running the fiber.  Obviously this is
good for them, because they get their employees&#039; salary covered and it
increases the amount of fiber they buy which lowers the cost to them.

6) The agreement with them is structured such that they are borrowing
the money from me.  My loan to them is secured by a lein on the
fiber.  If they go under, I own the fiber, and can use it to gain
access from somebody else.

7) The agreement also specifies that they pay more than a risk-free
interest rate (this is the same rate that the US pays to borrow
money), but less than market rate (because my loan is secured by the
fiber that I want in the first place.)

8) They provide me with broadband Internet at the same rate as
everyone else in the area, but instead of paying me cash, they pay
down the loan.

9) And of course, the reason they do this is so that they can sell
Internet access to everyone else between my house and their POP.

I&#039;m getting numbers from my local ISP soon (written in February), but
the capital should be less than that needed for a new car.

Unfortunately, they never got back to me with actual numbers except to
say informally &quot;you wouldn&#039;t want to pay it.&quot;  I&#039;m not sure I agree
with them, but I haven&#039;t pressed the issue.

Oh, and the other thing about the economics is that you need something
which is 1) legal, and 2) REALLY BIG.  Here&#039;s my (as yet unpublished)
secret plan:

Go buy a high-def video camera, and use it to film local sports events
in their entirety.  Then put that video on a file server connected to
a wifi router.  Announce the game video availability on
NorthCountrySports.net.  Put a snippet of the game on NCSN.  People
could take their laptop to some place within range of the wifi, and
watch the game in high-def.

Assume that this is a success (which it wouldn&#039;t be right now because
HD video cameras are way too expensive.)
At first, there would be only one wifi router.  People nearly in range
would complain to us (we would encourage them to do that).  We would
place a wifi router to bring them into range.  And so on and so on.
Eventually we would have Potsdam covered.  Then we go to SLIC and say
&quot;Hey, you want to sell these people high speed Internet, since they
already have a broadband (if local-only) connection into their house?
We&#039;ll only charge you a small interconnection fee.&quot;

The next step is to convert them to fiber customers.  Y&#039;know what I
think is the correct way to do that?  Blown-in fiber.  Sumitomo makes
it.  That way the cable hangers are just provisioning plastic tubes.
Splicing one just uses a sharp knife and plastic glue.  It&#039;s also
crucial to use a single fiber.

It&#039;s gotta be cheap, cheap, cheap to run FTTH.  Right now it&#039;s way too
expensive, and it&#039;s mostly the labor needed to hang or bury the cable.
The fiber itself isn&#039;t expensive.  Neither is terminating it: $50 per
end.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m looking at an email I sent to this &#8220;doc&#8221; guy back in 2007:</p>
<p>1) My house is where it is.  Nothing will change that.  Thus, whatever<br />
I have to pay in terms of capital costs to get fiber to my house is<br />
just another aspect of the capital costs of my house, like the number<br />
of square feet, the type of siding, the number of acres, etc.</p>
<p>2) Businesses have trouble raising capital.  There&#8217;s no magic wand;<br />
every kind of capital has its cost, most of which is related to the<br />
risk.  This includes ISPs.</p>
<p>3) My local ISP would be happy to run fiber out to my house, if they<br />
could get sufficient return on the capital expended to cover the cost<br />
of the capital.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s the solution:</p>
<p>4) Just as I have to have somewhere to live, I have to have Internet<br />
access.  It&#8217;s a necessity to me.  Thus, I will spend my savings, or<br />
borrow money, to buy a house and, I propose, a fiber run from my ISP&#8217;s<br />
POP to my house.</p>
<p>5) I pay them their cost for running the fiber.  Obviously this is<br />
good for them, because they get their employees&#8217; salary covered and it<br />
increases the amount of fiber they buy which lowers the cost to them.</p>
<p>6) The agreement with them is structured such that they are borrowing<br />
the money from me.  My loan to them is secured by a lein on the<br />
fiber.  If they go under, I own the fiber, and can use it to gain<br />
access from somebody else.</p>
<p>7) The agreement also specifies that they pay more than a risk-free<br />
interest rate (this is the same rate that the US pays to borrow<br />
money), but less than market rate (because my loan is secured by the<br />
fiber that I want in the first place.)</p>
<p> <img src='http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_cool.gif' alt='8)' class='wp-smiley' /> They provide me with broadband Internet at the same rate as<br />
everyone else in the area, but instead of paying me cash, they pay<br />
down the loan.</p>
<p>9) And of course, the reason they do this is so that they can sell<br />
Internet access to everyone else between my house and their POP.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m getting numbers from my local ISP soon (written in February), but<br />
the capital should be less than that needed for a new car.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, they never got back to me with actual numbers except to<br />
say informally &#8220;you wouldn&#8217;t want to pay it.&#8221;  I&#8217;m not sure I agree<br />
with them, but I haven&#8217;t pressed the issue.</p>
<p>Oh, and the other thing about the economics is that you need something<br />
which is 1) legal, and 2) REALLY BIG.  Here&#8217;s my (as yet unpublished)<br />
secret plan:</p>
<p>Go buy a high-def video camera, and use it to film local sports events<br />
in their entirety.  Then put that video on a file server connected to<br />
a wifi router.  Announce the game video availability on<br />
&nbsp;<a href="http://NorthCountrySports.net" title="http://NorthCountrySports.<br />
" target="_blank">NorthCountrySports.net</a>.  Put a snippet of the game on NCSN.  People<br />
could take their laptop to some place within range of the wifi, and<br />
watch the game in high-def.</p>
<p>Assume that this is a success (which it wouldn&#8217;t be right now because<br />
HD video cameras are way too expensive.)<br />
At first, there would be only one wifi router.  People nearly in range<br />
would complain to us (we would encourage them to do that).  We would<br />
place a wifi router to bring them into range.  And so on and so on.<br />
Eventually we would have Potsdam covered.  Then we go to SLIC and say<br />
&#8220;Hey, you want to sell these people high speed Internet, since they<br />
already have a broadband (if local-only) connection into their house?<br />
We&#8217;ll only charge you a small interconnection fee.&#8221;</p>
<p>The next step is to convert them to fiber customers.  Y&#8217;know what I<br />
think is the correct way to do that?  Blown-in fiber.  Sumitomo makes<br />
it.  That way the cable hangers are just provisioning plastic tubes.<br />
Splicing one just uses a sharp knife and plastic glue.  It&#8217;s also<br />
crucial to use a single fiber.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s gotta be cheap, cheap, cheap to run FTTH.  Right now it&#8217;s way too<br />
expensive, and it&#8217;s mostly the labor needed to hang or bury the cable.<br />
The fiber itself isn&#8217;t expensive.  Neither is terminating it: $50 per<br />
end.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nicolas Ward</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/05/27/were-gonna-need-a-bigger-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-170302</link>
		<dc:creator>Nicolas Ward</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2009 16:37:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1616#comment-170302</guid>
		<description>I think it&#039;s interesting that until fairly recently, a lot of science fiction depicted telecommunication of the future as interactive television as well... even in films up into the &#039;90s, you had videophones mashing together a TV, a phone, and a line, with little or no idea that the general purpose computers catching on in business would be able to do networked multimedia communication. To me that&#039;s proof of how much of a surprise it was, that many futurists didn&#039;t even consider it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think it&#8217;s interesting that until fairly recently, a lot of science fiction depicted telecommunication of the future as interactive television as well&#8230; even in films up into the &#8217;90s, you had videophones mashing together a TV, a phone, and a line, with little or no idea that the general purpose computers catching on in business would be able to do networked multimedia communication. To me that&#8217;s proof of how much of a surprise it was, that many futurists didn&#8217;t even consider it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Doc Searls</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/05/27/were-gonna-need-a-bigger-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-170285</link>
		<dc:creator>Doc Searls</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2009 15:30:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1616#comment-170285</guid>
		<description>Go for it, Pauly. It&#039;ll probably spread better if you just use it. Don&#039;t bother with giving credit. 

Just &lt;a href=&quot;http://twitter.com/dsearls/status/1948270534&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;tweeted your line&lt;/a&gt; anyway. :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Go for it, Pauly. It&#8217;ll probably spread better if you just use it. Don&#8217;t bother with giving credit. </p>
<p>Just <a href="http://twitter.com/dsearls/status/1948270534" rel="nofollow">tweeted your line</a> anyway. <img src='http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pauly</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/05/27/were-gonna-need-a-bigger-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-170148</link>
		<dc:creator>Pauly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2009 02:57:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1616#comment-170148</guid>
		<description>&quot;Sphinctered&quot; is the ne plus ultra absolute best term I&#039;ve ever heard for the artificial scarcity problem. Okay for me to use it? Of course I&#039;ll give the credit!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Sphinctered&#8221; is the ne plus ultra absolute best term I&#8217;ve ever heard for the artificial scarcity problem. Okay for me to use it? Of course I&#8217;ll give the credit!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: We’re gonna need a bigger boat &#124; Blog.Wood</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/05/27/were-gonna-need-a-bigger-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-170102</link>
		<dc:creator>We’re gonna need a bigger boat &#124; Blog.Wood</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 23:23:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1616#comment-170102</guid>
		<description>[...] the rest here: We’re gonna need a bigger boat &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160; &#160;   This entry was posted in MOVIES, Zeitgeist and tagged [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] the rest here: We’re gonna need a bigger boat &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;   This entry was posted in MOVIES, Zeitgeist and tagged [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
