and she said.. "how you interpret the dream is probably more important than the dream itself"

America, greatest nation in the world!.. right? umm.. right?

Regardless, in some sectors, innovation is erroding around us. Japan has historically beaten us in the wireless race, with 3rd generation cell networks (3G) and now they are working on 4G:

In field experiments, NTT DoCoMo, the largest mobile phone operator in Japan, achieved an approximate 5Gbps downlink data rate. That beats previous tests by a factor of two, as DoCoMo managed to achieve 2.5Gbps over a year ago in December 2005.

While these are only tests and adoption will be a long time coming, the US is still struggling in 2.5G land.. if you can call it that.

5Gbps = 5,000,000 bits per second

5,000,000 bits per second = 625,000 bytes per second

625,000 bytes per second = 610 megabytes per second

Or, in other words, the size of a well-compressed DivX movie. Per second. Scalabilty aside, the implications for mobile television and other (hopefully more productive) mobile services is huge.

So who cares? I've never been an early-adopter on the cellphone front and I still don't especially like having to carry one around, but I am but one man. The reality is that where innovation stagnates, economies are stifled.

What's worse is that the wireless carriers still have a stranglehold on consumers and they don't look like they want to let go. Law professor and Net Neutrality activist Tim Wu thinks things should be otherwise with four points:

.. Carriers exercise excessive control over what devices may be used on the public’s wireless spectrum. The carriers place strong controls over “foreign attachments,” like the AT&T of the 1950s. These controls continue to affect the innovation and development of new devices for wireless networks.
Today, the FCC has ordered broadband carriers to respect basic principles of network neutrality. Consumers have the basic right to use the applications of their choice and view the content of their choice. [Wireless carriers who offer data services are not held to these rules.]
Consumer disclosure is a major problem in the wireless world, and better choices come from more information. Carriers should disclose, fully, prominently, and in plain English, the following information: Limits on bandwidth usage; Devices that are locked to a single network; and Important limitations placed on features.
The industry should re-evaluate its “walled garden” approach to application development, and work together to create clear and unified standards to which developers can work. Application development for mobile devices is stalled, and it is in the carriers’ own interest to try and improve the development environment.

To argue otherwise is dinosaurific. The Internet, while being a minefield of opposing standards and proprietary systems, has nevertheless become what it is despite these problems - this is because of the standards that have managed to get a toehold such. This equals innovation, productivity, and economic growth.

From my own experiences, I can list off a number of immediate problems I myself have with the wireless industry.

Phones tied to carriers (i.e. "locked phones")
Phone packages including X amount of minutes, as opposed to reasonable per-minute usage
New phone purchase requirements when signing up for a new service plan
Restrictive service plans that tie consumers into year or longer contracts with astronomical cancellation fees
Lack of interface standards with respect to phone systems including: typing interfaces, voicemail interfaces, and phone interfaces
Successful attempts by the phone companies to dupe consumers (i.e. lack of proper disclosure). The sad fact of the matter is that, with over 200 million cellphone subscribers in the USA, a vast majority of them do not have the knowledge or information to properly understand the implications of the contracts they are signing
Lack of Quality of Service (QoS). This might be okay in a fledgling industry such as the wireless market but throw us a bone. If I buy a cellphone which you assure me will receive quality coverage throughout the city and the two places I do not get any reception is my home and my office, consider giving a refund. If it is truly about giving the consumer the best service, consider that if you are unable to provide service in the two places the user is most likely to use their phone then perhaps your company is not the best to provide them with any service at all

Tim Wu goes on to say:

The historic parallel is instructive. Wired voice telephone networks had more or less reached their full potential under AT&T by the 1960s. To reach the next stage, the most important steps were not technological but deregulatory—destroying impediments created by AT&T that restricted innovation and competition. To reach the “next stage” in wireless communications, the most important step may be opening the networks to true competitive entry.

The Washington Post's take on the story includes some input from the FCC:

For now, at least, [FCC Chairman] Martin said, the major wireless carriers are competing vigorously against each other, and he said would not favor FCC intervention unless there was evidence that innovation was beginning to suffer and prices were becoming unreasonable.

But that is exactly what is happening. Innovation is suffering and prices have and continue to be unreasonable. AT&T, which was so decent with us through the era of landline dominance, had this to say:

"This whole issue is a giant red herring," said AT&T spokesman Mark Siegel. "This is a fiercely competitive industry," which has grown "almost entirely through the force of competition in the marketplace, more innovative devices and services, and continually lower prices."

And, of course, we should believe them this time around.. right?