<?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/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Trouble with Broadband Deployment Statistics</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cabletechtalk.com/news-items/2008/02/06/the-trouble-with-broadband-deployment-statistics/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cabletechtalk.com/news-items/2008/02/06/the-trouble-with-broadband-deployment-statistics/</link>
	<description>Technology &#38; Telecommunications Policy Discussion</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 23:42:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Digital Society &#187; Blog Archive &#187; The Akamai Speed Report Is Skewed, Too</title>
		<link>http://www.cabletechtalk.com/news-items/2008/02/06/the-trouble-with-broadband-deployment-statistics/comment-page-1/#comment-4561</link>
		<dc:creator>Digital Society &#187; Blog Archive &#187; The Akamai Speed Report Is Skewed, Too</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Apr 2010 21:31:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cabletechtalk.com/2008/02/06/the-trouble-with-broadband-deployment-statistics/#comment-4561</guid>
		<description>[...] I was at NCTA, I wrote a series of posts about the OECD study and the multiple flaws with their methodology &#8211; including the use of advertised speeds/prices, exclusion of direct fiber/T1 lines for [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I was at NCTA, I wrote a series of posts about the OECD study and the multiple flaws with their methodology &#8211; including the use of advertised speeds/prices, exclusion of direct fiber/T1 lines for [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Public Policy Lunch &#171; The Cable Show Blog</title>
		<link>http://www.cabletechtalk.com/news-items/2008/02/06/the-trouble-with-broadband-deployment-statistics/comment-page-1/#comment-391</link>
		<dc:creator>Public Policy Lunch &#171; The Cable Show Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 23:11:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cabletechtalk.com/2008/02/06/the-trouble-with-broadband-deployment-statistics/#comment-391</guid>
		<description>[...] The Trouble with Broadband Deployment Statistics [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The Trouble with Broadband Deployment Statistics [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Technology Liberation Front &#187; Archive &#187; More on the OECD Broadband Report</title>
		<link>http://www.cabletechtalk.com/news-items/2008/02/06/the-trouble-with-broadband-deployment-statistics/comment-page-1/#comment-357</link>
		<dc:creator>Technology Liberation Front &#187; Archive &#187; More on the OECD Broadband Report</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2008 00:45:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cabletechtalk.com/2008/02/06/the-trouble-with-broadband-deployment-statistics/#comment-357</guid>
		<description>[...] National Cable &amp; Telecommunications Association blog did a series of posts back in February about the OECD study. There seems to be three basic criticisms. First, [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] National Cable &#38; Telecommunications Association blog did a series of posts back in February about the OECD study. There seems to be three basic criticisms. First, [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Turk</title>
		<link>http://www.cabletechtalk.com/news-items/2008/02/06/the-trouble-with-broadband-deployment-statistics/comment-page-1/#comment-96</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Turk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2008 21:30:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cabletechtalk.com/2008/02/06/the-trouble-with-broadband-deployment-statistics/#comment-96</guid>
		<description>No worries.  Just thought I&#039;d point you that way.  :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No worries.  Just thought I&#8217;d point you that way.  <img src='http://www.cabletechtalk.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wyatt Ditzler</title>
		<link>http://www.cabletechtalk.com/news-items/2008/02/06/the-trouble-with-broadband-deployment-statistics/comment-page-1/#comment-95</link>
		<dc:creator>Wyatt Ditzler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2008 21:29:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cabletechtalk.com/2008/02/06/the-trouble-with-broadband-deployment-statistics/#comment-95</guid>
		<description>Sorry Michael, had not gotten that far yet. Been a busy day.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry Michael, had not gotten that far yet. Been a busy day.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Turk</title>
		<link>http://www.cabletechtalk.com/news-items/2008/02/06/the-trouble-with-broadband-deployment-statistics/comment-page-1/#comment-94</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Turk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2008 21:27:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cabletechtalk.com/2008/02/06/the-trouble-with-broadband-deployment-statistics/#comment-94</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Do we need to count connections or subscriptions? I think it would be difficult to count the number of people connected per subscription.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

That actually gets directly to the heart of the problem I addressed in &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cabletechtalk.com/2008/02/07/all-things-being-equal-all-things-are-not-equal/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;the second installment of this series.&lt;/a&gt;  Counting the number of subscriptions as a function of &quot;per 100 inhabitants&quot; becomes problematic for exactly that reason.  

Due to fluctuations in household size, 100 subscriptions in the US reaches about 20% more poeple than the same 100 subscriptions in Denmark, for instance.  It adversely impacts our ranking depsite having more people covered per connection.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Do we need to count connections or subscriptions? I think it would be difficult to count the number of people connected per subscription.</p></blockquote>
<p>That actually gets directly to the heart of the problem I addressed in <a href="http://www.cabletechtalk.com/2008/02/07/all-things-being-equal-all-things-are-not-equal/" rel="nofollow">the second installment of this series.</a>  Counting the number of subscriptions as a function of &#8220;per 100 inhabitants&#8221; becomes problematic for exactly that reason.  </p>
<p>Due to fluctuations in household size, 100 subscriptions in the US reaches about 20% more poeple than the same 100 subscriptions in Denmark, for instance.  It adversely impacts our ranking depsite having more people covered per connection.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wyatt Ditzler</title>
		<link>http://www.cabletechtalk.com/news-items/2008/02/06/the-trouble-with-broadband-deployment-statistics/comment-page-1/#comment-93</link>
		<dc:creator>Wyatt Ditzler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2008 21:16:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cabletechtalk.com/2008/02/06/the-trouble-with-broadband-deployment-statistics/#comment-93</guid>
		<description>Do we need to count connections or subscriptions? I think it would be difficult to count the number of people connected per subscription.

Cheers</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Do we need to count connections or subscriptions? I think it would be difficult to count the number of people connected per subscription.</p>
<p>Cheers</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CableTechTalk &#187; Blog Archive &#187; All Things Being Equal, All Things Are Not Equal</title>
		<link>http://www.cabletechtalk.com/news-items/2008/02/06/the-trouble-with-broadband-deployment-statistics/comment-page-1/#comment-83</link>
		<dc:creator>CableTechTalk &#187; Blog Archive &#187; All Things Being Equal, All Things Are Not Equal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Feb 2008 21:47:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cabletechtalk.com/2008/02/06/the-trouble-with-broadband-deployment-statistics/#comment-83</guid>
		<description>[...] &#160;  &#171; The Trouble with Broadband Deployment Statistics [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] &nbsp;  &laquo; The Trouble with Broadband Deployment Statistics [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Turk</title>
		<link>http://www.cabletechtalk.com/news-items/2008/02/06/the-trouble-with-broadband-deployment-statistics/comment-page-1/#comment-82</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Turk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Feb 2008 21:35:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cabletechtalk.com/2008/02/06/the-trouble-with-broadband-deployment-statistics/#comment-82</guid>
		<description>A T1 line is not a fiber optic line.  A T1 line is made of 24 8-bit channels (essentially a normal twisted-pair phone line).  When you look at a T1 block in your phone closet, it actually looks like a normal punch block and is largely indistinguishable from your phones.  A T1 line operates at 1.544 m-bits.  Fiber optic lines are different.  Fiber optic lines are much faster than a T1.

The heart of your question isn&#039;t dependent on that, so we&#039;ll move on.  A number of years ago, I worked in an office in Phoenix that had about 20 people connected via one 768k DSL line.  They would be counted.  When I first moved to DC, I worked in an office with about 50 people connected via a T1 (again, at 1.544 m-bits).  They were not counted.

The issue that creates for the OECD study is it a) reduces the number of connections counted, b) reduces the average speed of those connections, and c) discounts 50 people who are covered.

Now both of those were businesses.  At the time, I had a DSL line at home as well (I now have cable :-).  If you count both businesses and home connections, I was double counted in Phoenix and not in DC.  Trying to measure broadband deployment when what you count and what you don&#039;t is arbitrary becomes problematic.

As I mentioned in the post, some have suggested that you eliminate the counting of businesses at all and simply measure residential connections whether they are DSl, cable, Wi-Fi, T1, or anything else.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A T1 line is not a fiber optic line.  A T1 line is made of 24 8-bit channels (essentially a normal twisted-pair phone line).  When you look at a T1 block in your phone closet, it actually looks like a normal punch block and is largely indistinguishable from your phones.  A T1 line operates at 1.544 m-bits.  Fiber optic lines are different.  Fiber optic lines are much faster than a T1.</p>
<p>The heart of your question isn&#8217;t dependent on that, so we&#8217;ll move on.  A number of years ago, I worked in an office in Phoenix that had about 20 people connected via one 768k DSL line.  They would be counted.  When I first moved to DC, I worked in an office with about 50 people connected via a T1 (again, at 1.544 m-bits).  They were not counted.</p>
<p>The issue that creates for the OECD study is it a) reduces the number of connections counted, b) reduces the average speed of those connections, and c) discounts 50 people who are covered.</p>
<p>Now both of those were businesses.  At the time, I had a DSL line at home as well (I now have cable <img src='http://www.cabletechtalk.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> .  If you count both businesses and home connections, I was double counted in Phoenix and not in DC.  Trying to measure broadband deployment when what you count and what you don&#8217;t is arbitrary becomes problematic.</p>
<p>As I mentioned in the post, some have suggested that you eliminate the counting of businesses at all and simply measure residential connections whether they are DSl, cable, Wi-Fi, T1, or anything else.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wyatt Ditzler</title>
		<link>http://www.cabletechtalk.com/news-items/2008/02/06/the-trouble-with-broadband-deployment-statistics/comment-page-1/#comment-81</link>
		<dc:creator>Wyatt Ditzler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Feb 2008 20:55:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cabletechtalk.com/2008/02/06/the-trouble-with-broadband-deployment-statistics/#comment-81</guid>
		<description>Michael,

I believe a T1 line is a fiber optic line. Since all fiber lines of 
256 kbit/s are counted I don&#039;t see an issue there.  

Let me sum up what I think you are saying just to be sure.  Because a T1 line is subscribed to by one person only, each T1 connection is counted once. Even though in the U.S. one T1 line may connect many people to the Internet.  Whereas in other countries, DSL was used, and since DSL is subscribed to one person and not used by many, the numbers are inflated for the DSL countries because there is a lesser ratio of users per connection subscriber?  Where a T1 in the U.S. might allow 100 people access to the Internet, a DSL connection might allow fewer people access, thus more DSL connections are needed.

If I have understood you correctly, then we would need to adjust the OECD to include all persons that connect to the Internet per subscription.  Logistically, I do not see how that is feasible. Have you any ideas?

Cheers,
Wyatt</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Michael,</p>
<p>I believe a T1 line is a fiber optic line. Since all fiber lines of<br />
256 kbit/s are counted I don&#8217;t see an issue there.  </p>
<p>Let me sum up what I think you are saying just to be sure.  Because a T1 line is subscribed to by one person only, each T1 connection is counted once. Even though in the U.S. one T1 line may connect many people to the Internet.  Whereas in other countries, DSL was used, and since DSL is subscribed to one person and not used by many, the numbers are inflated for the DSL countries because there is a lesser ratio of users per connection subscriber?  Where a T1 in the U.S. might allow 100 people access to the Internet, a DSL connection might allow fewer people access, thus more DSL connections are needed.</p>
<p>If I have understood you correctly, then we would need to adjust the OECD to include all persons that connect to the Internet per subscription.  Logistically, I do not see how that is feasible. Have you any ideas?</p>
<p>Cheers,<br />
Wyatt</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

